Quote from: Z-tight on Today at 02:20:44 PM

Quote from: DaveF on April 03, 2025, 11:53:25 AM

Also lets not forget I can open source a wallet that automatically sends everything from everyone's wallet into mine once a year. Could even put comments in the code as to what it does. People are going to still install / use it if I promote it enough because too many people don't read the code.

True, but there is still a chance that some people are going to read the code and alert the rest of the community about the vulnerability, however, if it was closed source, there is no chance of that happening and people's wallets will keep getting drained and they will be waiting for solutions and answers from you the dev, lol.

I get it that open source does not automatically mean safe, but if it is an open source and well reviewed software, it should be better than most closed source options, with the users good opsec of course.

For software usages such as this new asset class we call "cryptocurrencies" - which derives its ethos from decentralization, censorship-resistance, permissionlessness, and "don't trust, verify", then OF COURSE it would only make sense if the network/protocol its built on is Open Source.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Plus an Open Source license helps with Bitcoin's adoption because it's permissive and it doesn't restrict its use, development, and distribution.