ProximaX & Jaguar Q+A

#6

image
image.jpg960×1280 332 KB

Should ProximaX share booths with NEM at Conferences, Crypto meetings , shows and meet ups ?

7 Likes
#7

…and who should be responsible for costs…

#8

On ProximaX website you’re listed as an advisor.

what percent of your time is spent on NEM vs ProximaX, and is it a purely advisory role or also actual technical development?

1 Like
#9

What about NEM Foundation members/ developers who worked on NEM tools and switched to working on ProximaX during Lon’s Presidency.

Is it acceptable by you that a ExCo is launching private ICO and source its developers and other staff from NEM talent pool? Should this platform be endorsed and promoted by NEM Foundation? Same question about the Leader of this ICO, who constantly puts NEM in a bad light. Do you think NEM Foundation should maintain good relations with project like that?

7 Likes
#10

What is your vision in working cohesively with ProximaX (as a NEM partner) and working with NEM.io Foundation?

What would say would be a succesful 2019 in your view for NEM?

2 Likes
#11

When Catapult ?

3 Likes
Election Concerns
#12

Hi Alex, Hi Jag,
Thanks for opening this up for a Q&A with your valuable time.
My question would be: ‘How exactly do you view ProximaX in relation to NEM public Catapult (help/hindersnce),and moreover, what do you and the other two core devs need to complete Catapult for the public chain?’
Thanks again,
Laura

5 Likes
#13

Jaguar, I have two questions.

  1. On-chain logic is more and more of a necessity for businesses. The recent Catapult update, Bison, makes inroads to this with the introduction of state Merkling. It may not be in the plans, of course, but how would you introduce more on-chain logic in NEM from an engineering standpoint?

  2. I join in with the rest of the choir with regards to Lon Wong’s clear abusive use of NEM resources to build up his ProximaX project, and troubling evidence linking ProximaX to existing council members Stephen Chia and Nelson Valero to suggest conflicts of interest. Do you support the continued licensing of Catapult intellectual property that you and your team have created to ProximaX, when it is clear that ProximaX may not have the best interest of the greater NEM ecosystem in mind? It is clear that they are a fork and, in kindest, most forgiving terms, at the very least a direct future competitor.

13 Likes
#14

ProximaX and NEM have different goals and can coexist. Proximax is more designed as an application platform and is more centrally managed.

ProximaX is based on a private chain of NEM with some modifications. How they deploy it is up to them, but they’re no different than any other company using a private catapult chain (e.g. LuxTag, Blockstart, He3, etc). The difference is that the ProximaX team is the only team currently contributing back to the ecosystem. They have written a Go-SDK for catapult .

Additionally, the have made changes to a fork of catapult-server, which I have reviewed. Some of their changes are not applicable to the main trunk, but some could be valuable and find their way into the main catapult-server trunk eventually.

Even if one views ProximaX as a “competitor”, it’s not uncommon for competitors to work together on open source projects. For example, two of the largest contributors to Hadoop are Hortonworks and Cloudera who are in direct competition.

Due to the shared codebase, atomic swaps should be possible between ProximaX and catapult chains.

10 Likes
Misha Granin for Vice President (at least for a day, so we all can create NEM Foundation 2.0)
#15

Catapult supports a plugin model, which makes it easy to add custom functionality to private chains. Generally, we support people sandboxing new features on private chains first. If there is demand for the feature and it works on private chains, they we can consider adding it to the main (public) chain. This also allows better customization of private chains since there are some things a (trusted) private chain will want that doesn’t make sense for a (trustless) public chain.

I think Lon should not have launched ProximaX while he was NEM Foundation President because it lent itself to really poor optics. This was the primary reason he stepped down. I am not sure of what clear abusive use of NEM resources you’re referring to specifically. There was certainly some intermingling of resources because the foundation doesn’t have any conflict of interest guidelines, but Lon is not the only one to have blurred these lines.

I don’t think Stephen or Nelson are employed by ProximaX (although Stephen’s brother is an employee) but they probably both hold XPX. The election will decide whether or not this is a sufficient conflict of interest.

As long as ProximaX abides by the software license (LGPL) , they can do what they want with the code. This is the whole premise of open source.

5 Likes
#16

I’m not sure why you’re singling out ProximaX? Maybe you missed the NEM pavilion at Consensus 2018. There were at least 11 companies that the NEM foundation sponsored; only one of which had a catapult-based demo.

If ProximaX and NEM are sharing costs, I don’t see too much of a problem.

6 Likes
#17

I am unaware of any developers that switched to working on ProximaX. However, since Lon stepped down, ProximaX has been much more successful in hiring quality developers than the foundation. That is true.

I agree that Lon should not have launched ProximaX while he was NEM Foundation President because it lent itself to really poor optics. If he had waited until the end of his term, there wouldn’t have been any issue.

I would prefer the foundation focus on marketing and selling catapult-based chains. Considering the code contributions being made by the ProximaX team, I don’t see any reason to cut off them and Lon.

10 Likes
#18

Hmm, interesting… Meanwhile while he was at NEM there was lack hiring of developers and lack of Catapult roadmap approval. His 2 lackeys currently still within NEM are ensuring this continues.

Sorry to put a negative spin on this, but they’re both close to Lon and have vested interests in ProximaX doing well, and NEM not doing well.

2 Likes
#19

In hindsight they catch cry of a lot of the council and reps in 2017 was “NDA’s”…sounded great at the time.
Also I can’t see Nem and Proximax working together, I call bullshit on that front.
The current/present toxicity between the two community’s would have to change to a more realistic positive approach for that to happen successfully.
Dan

2 Likes
#20

This is important, Open source works so well because of the nacent ability for 3rd parties to contribute, if the NEM Foundation has basically stalled at hiring new talent then how else is Catapult going to be getting new features if not through 3rd party contributions?

I really hope that ProximaX does launch on catapult, but at the moment it just feels like we are falling further and further behind in development, at some point that is going to become a problem for re-integration.

3 Likes
#21

Not sure if open source for Nem has had much momentum in 2018, unless I have been looking at the wrong repo.
Dan

#22

Again another important point I have brought up with a few candidates, the NEM ecosystem is spread amongst several privately owned repo’s - this all needs to be consolidated under a single NEM branded Organisation Repo for it to be effective, Open source collaboration needs to improve drastically.

1 Like
#23

:disappointed_relieved:

To be honest, I’m a bit upset that you declare that only ProximaX contributes back to the NEM ecosystem.
Rene

18 Likes
#24

Well @r3n3 that is because it doesn’t.
Startlingly all the Proximax folk seem to be oblivious to the fact that it is actually Nem.
They all bag Nem, while in the same time it is built on Nem.
Some guy today was telling me how “Byzantine” nanowallet was…lol, yeah well it’s actually head and shoulders above any Proximax wallet that appears to only accept XPX transfers.

Omg…
Dan

#25

Question for Jaguar or anyone :

From ProximaX website :

Yes, each transaction on ProximaX generates a transaction on the NEM blockchain. And each transaction on the NEM blockchain needs XEM (fees).

ProximaX released their testnet. Is there link to NEM testnet ?
Easy to see if they are true. If they are , all ProximaX testnet transaction will be on NEM testnet.
If not, ProximaX is FORK .

More from ProximaX website :

ProximaX (pronounced as Proxima X) is a blockchain-based decentralized storage and content delivery network developed by some of the people behind the NEM blockchain platform.

Which people ?

EDIT :

Where is even link to ProximaX testnet ?
I see hype but product hard to find :roll_eyes:

1 Like