I think he just gave eccube as an example of what would be benificial. I don’t think there is an actual deal there.
No. It is not an example. It is in the Japanese national news. You won’t find it unless you read Japanese. Like I said, there will be more and more and we won’t be able to keep track of it, especially if it is all going to be in some foreign language.
There is a big following in Japan, and I can tell you, it can get viral.
Anyway, this is all blue ocean approach. Don’t hope that this can happen without a mijin in cryptoland. Like I said, you be the judge. I have said my piece. Like you all, I have no interest in Mijin, but I view it differently.
In any case, this has always been how I looked at NEM, even earlier on, i.e., my focus is on the 7B people.
Fair enough.
That’s great news about Japan then. Would be pretty awesome to have a little post in the forum about it, for non-japaneses.
One way or the other, I am very optimistic about the future of NEM and crypto in general.
Happy 2016 to all of you guys. And to NEM of course 
Here’s CoinTelegraph’s article about EC-Cube
http://prtimes.jp/main/html/rd/p/000000020.000009812.html
AS far as the original question:
I was just wondering what the community’s thoughts are on how NEM and Mijin should be related. Are there any ideas on what you would like to see?
Thanks to Mijin, huge companies are looking at NEM. We really want to create a win-win situation, so please share your ideas!
From my understanding, Mijin is a fork of NEM, so as a completely separate blockchain, there is no direct interaction with the NEM platform.
Of course holders of XEM will want some kind of ‘touchpoint’ between the XEM and Mijin functionality. Or how can XEM holders directly benefit from Mijin’s success?
- Use XEM for Mosaics/Namespaces when they roll out in the private chains
- use XEM for other premium features in the private chains
- some type of exchange for XEM to Mijin (coins)
- more visibility of NEM as the ‘public’ blockchain solution
Ex. it’d be nice to see NEM offered in their ‘plans’ for more exposure
http://mijin.io/en/mijin-cloud-chain-beta-test
They currently have
- free private chain
- paid premium private chain
Include the option
- NEM global public chain to test drive what Mijin has to offer.
Some companies may determine that a private chain is unnecessary and can use the NEM platform for their needs.
All in all, for me Mijin is a huge positive for NEM.
1 Like
So Mijin is like NEM but on steroids right?
Mijin is NEM and NEM is Mijin.
It would be great if mijin was also published under an open source license. That would let people run their private chains on their servers, giving the opportunity to small devs not able to cough up the dollars for the commercial mijin license in some months. That would spread the technology, broadening the clients pool for mijin on the longer term , and be beneficial for nem if there is easy mijin-nem interaction. Not sure this is a realistic approach for the companies involved, but it might be a winning strategy. What do you think?
2 Likes
right.
NEM is Mijin, and Mijin is NEM. When NEM is fully open source, so will Mijin. Mijin was never meant to be put under wraps. In fact, 0.6.72 should have elements of Mijin in there too.
You seem to be trying to shield accountability by the lack of formalities, with the excuse of being in the fringes.
Guess what, that argument didn’t work for pirateat40 in court.
Fine, you wanna play by those rules, you are clearly thinking as a scammer.
I was only asking for clarification, and your only rebuttal is question dodging and exposing very questionable ethics.
But to answer your really immature and questionable rebuttal, I will teach you a lesson:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=422129.0
It clearly states:
The fundraising is especially designed to promote fairness and egalitarianism. This is the first funding scheme of this type ever and we believe it is revolutionary in its effort to bring egalitarianism to the crypto industry.
Yes, it clearly states it is a “fundraising”, not a donation. We all who participated gave the money because we bought that vision. The calculated risks were done trusting on the success on the vision of the NEM project.
Such dream was seeing the NEM network to grow and being used as a fair financial system.
It may be a highly speculative investment, but it is an investment nevertheless, and as such everybody who puts money expects likely a return. We all know and it is pointless to point out that nobody guarantees success of such investments, but certain basic ethical issues that draws the line between a scam from a failed venture.
The main assumption that we all had as investors was that NEM would be the developed network, and as a successful network it would appreciate the value of its currency as its usage would grow.
The key point being: being actively developed and being used.
But it would be worrisome if NEM’s funds were just used for the development for a bare platform as a mvp (without any obligation to the users on bitcointalk of course, because there is no legal obligation nor legal contract between them, right? they are just fools who gives you money for no reason, according to your assessment) from which its founders would freely use to launch private ventures based on its fork.
So my question was simple to dispel any doubts:
- Our interest is to see NEM to thrive and be used as a financial network
- Mijin -prima facie- doesn’t seem to contribute to point 1 as stated before it is actually a private fork of it.
- Lead programmers seem to be focusing on Mijin.
So my question was simple and the worries justified.
But instead of addressing these questions, you revealed yourself a sinister mindset @rockethead.
Even though there is no traditional legal contract between the project leaders and us, there is a moral obligation towards the community that supported the original proposal, from which the main mission was to develop a community and eventually a whole new economy.
I hope to see NEM succeeding as a financial network with all resources (including human resources) focused on commercializing ON the NEM network, not veering away with derivative forks that doesn’t add transactional volume nor demand on NEM.
If Mijin is a fork for private uses, and yet claiming that Nem is Mijin and Mijin is Nem is as nonsensical as forking bitcoin and using it in private banks and saying that JpMorganCoin is bitcoin just because they share the codebase, when you know very clearly that those would be two very distinct networks.
If my interpretation is wrong, I would like to know the details of why I am wrong and how exactly the fork benefits NEM, and how much time the developers of NEM are spending on Mijin.
1 Like
So are you seriously considering that the six hundreds (give or take) of bitcoin copy-pasted forks are somehow benefiting the main bitcoin project?
Exactly! +1
1 Like
It is a great thing that the 2 work together however in my oppinion nem should have tried to get more out of it.
The banks will be paying for the product , mijin will make money from it , the only onegetting no financial benefit is nem.
Yes, your interpretation is wrong,
MEN is open source project. Anyone can fork it any time.
If you want return on your investment sell now and you will get it. Price is quite high also thanks to makoto and news around mijin.
There is a difference between:
- a fork to change, modify or improve the code or to add functionality, but still use the same public blockchain. The improved code could be presented to and evaluated by the core devs. After approval they could merge the changes back into the main code branch.
- a fork to setup a private blockchain to keep it separated from the public NEM blockchain. Keeping code and functionality in both branches synced in the future will become harder and harder as time progresses.
I like option 1 and I like the mijin initiative, but option 2 should be avoided at all times.
2 Likes