interestingly lets take a look at the average salary for a google software engineer (arguably the most advanced on the planet)
http://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Google-Salaries-E9079.htm
looks like its around 170k a year which puts the hourly at just above 80$ per hour...
if its an open bid then by all means freebie is willing to tackle these two tasks. however charging us a fee to review our work? really?
aren't you the ones trying to find developers to work for you? thatls pretty redic... I should be charging you the fee.
i just want to make sure the community isnt being asked to fund software development with inflated numbers, freebie is willing to step up and solve this problem if we see people trying to take advantage of this insane concept that somehow development will require a team of 3 working at 200$ an hour on... changing fees? really? its pre existing code.
I'm really starting to like this "random coder on the forum".
Why would Cryptonomex have to review code that we (the BitShares Community) paid someone else to write for BitShares?
I thought Cryptonomex was no longer part of BitShares, we are only considering hiring CNX (via a Worker Proposal) and are not obligated in any way to do so.
I'm not saying we wouldn't want code reviewed that was written by another person/group, but I'm pretty sure we have plenty of qualified coders here that could/would do that for next to nothing.
Why are you (Dan) stating this like it's mandatory that CNX would handle that job?
This is a bit confusing.
On one hand CNX can work for anyone they want, hell you've even kind of thrown it in our face that CNX could work for others at a higher rate and have offers to do so, but it's like you're doing poor old BitShares a favor by offering to do this job for 2X the rate anyone else would. And on top of that it sounds like you're saying we're required to use CNX to then review anyone else's code that we chose over you.
It sounds like CNX is operating as a proxy ruler from afar, kind of like the US Government does things. 
Will you be installing a puppet regime next or is this your declaration that CNX is that puppet regime?
"Let my people go!"
"We have plenty of qualified coders here who would review the code for next to nothing" ??
Tuck, forgive me if you were being sarcastic (I can never tell), but this statement is absurd. We are talking about writing new code to change the native functionality of the blockchain. Do you honestly think that it is a wise idea to ridicule the idea of asking Cryptonomex (who are more familiar with graphene than anyone else) to audit and test the new code to make sure that it will work? They could do this faster, and more efficiently than anyone else at this stage.
So just to clarify, my understanding: you are talking about hiring someone who has little to no track record of writing code for graphene, and then just assuming that some (nonexistant) qualified graphene experts are just sitting around waiting to offer their code auditing skills for "next to nothing"?
I am not trying to come to the defense of Cryptonomex, they can defend themselves. I am just stating a FACT - They are the most qualified to audit any new code for graphene, and IMO we certainly want them auditing any new code that will be adopted by the blockchain at this stage- especially since we have still not achieved major adoption and (I would argue) are still vulnerable in many ways. Of course we all hope this will change going forward, as outside teams of coders learn to write for graphene, but this has not happened yet. Think about it this way - if there were a bunch of people sitting around who were qualified to audit new graphene code - don't you think that they would be writing code themselves as we speak? Where are they? I'm not saying they don't exist, but I am also not just assuming that they DO.
Show Posts
Great Stuff
