I’m all for advancing cryptography, but I don’t see how this is value-add for zcash holders. It offers no pros and has many cons. If a coinholder vote was made I would vote no and then buy more coins and vote no with those ones too.
edit: its like when your friend talks shit about you behind your back but then asks you for favors to your face
I don’t understand why the Zcash community is paying so much attention to this request.
Seth does not speak for Monero in any way, he is not a developer and he is not a researcher.
He is just a social media influencer notably thirsty for relevance and limelight, and the community should not dignify this by taking seriously him or his request.
To be fair, @sethforprivacy is a Monero dev. Source: v15 Network Upgrade Checklist · Issue #690 · monero-project/meta · GitHub 
The decision taken here is in the interest of the Zcash community. This is total opposite of working with Monero does.
You’re asking here as if the project you support is in any way collaborative towards the project ECC works on. Oh yeah, just to remind you, calling a widely-supported community decision as “shit” is not really collaborative.
To be fair, any real Monero dev who sees you calling Seth a “monero dev” would get offended by it.
Speaking for myself and not for ECC for all of this comment:
I support granting the exception, not just for Monero but for any comparable privacy-oriented coin.
Actually, I argued against using BOSL at all, primarily on grounds of potential license compatibility (actual or perceived), and on the basis that it would be likely to discourage third-party contributions (both improvements to the Halo 2 implementation, and development of a gadget ecosystem). I was and am very happy that the halo2 crates are being relicensed.
As an aside, most of the complicated parts of the Orchard circuit are implemented in the halo2_gadgets crate, which is MIT/Apache2 licenced. You can see to what extent this is the case by looking at the circuit sections of the Orchard book. The gadgets that are in the Orchard crate are mainly applications of Sinsemilla commitments (from halo2_gadgets) to the inputs used in Orchard. There are also non-circuit parts of Orchard implemented in the Orchard crate, but they are relatively simple.
Note that none of Orchard or any other part of Zcash is patented by ECC or has any other obstacles —other than some complexity— to its reimplementation. I am not aware of any other third-party patents that would cover any of the protocol, with the possible exception of a claimed patent on the FF1-AES algorithm (which I believe has prior art invalidating the claims of that patent for the parameters of that algorithm that we use). If there is any concern about that, the use of FF1-AES in the protocol is inessential and could be replaced with another suitable pseudo-random permutation.
The attitudes of some members of the Monero community toward Zcash, while indeed they are not very constructive, do not persuade me against any of my conclusions above.
He’s not a dev. He’s just keeping tracks of tickets. Some sort of janitor of the project if you will.
Since when has this community been so easily gaslit? Zcash community members threatening to keep tabs on people who vote yes, wildly generalising and trashing Monero devs, putting words in the Zcash devs mouths…
Please keep this discussion to a facts based constructive discussion. I’ve always been on the fence about BOSL since i haven’t seen any evidence that suggests it will achieve better outcomes for Zcash. But I also don’t have any evidence to suggest it won’t better outcome.
With respect to the issuing an exception to Monero I’m dubious if allowing the exemption would be detrimental to Zcash. As suggested by Zcash devs BOSL may actually be a detriment to Zcash by preventing future contributions.
P.S. on a comedic note the coolest thing about MIT license is the force reference to Zcash in the license of projects using it 
.
I wouldn’t pay too much attention. Monero project is deliberately obfuscating who is doing what and who is paid and who is not. By speculating you are just playing into that game.
Agree. This is a good point!
Noble people most often die in poverty 
I’m not an asshole, but I’ve invested a lot of money in Zcash, so all this spiritual impulse to help everyone who needs it is completely alien to me until I see the financial result.
More then fair and I think this is a really good reason the community need to have this discussion. But as I stated I’m not sure making the Zcash source code “harder” for others to use actually benefits you achieving your financial result.
No threats, accountability.
Nobody whatever his rank in the community should try to fuck with people’s investment. Otherwise, don’t call your project a cryptocurrency and don’t list on exchanges and don’t ask for a devfund.
In the real world, board members trying to ruin their investors go to jail, simple as that.
Why not simply MIT licence it at that point? As a side note my personal opinion is that MIT is the way to go eventually, when ECC is ready. Granting special exception to Monero sends out a message that we are so stupid as to give gifts to people who openly shit on us.
I agree. By the way, I’m keep calm anyway, since the ECC has always requested analysis and utility model modeling for Zcash before suggest various decisions to the community.
Does anyone know how many of the top 50 cryptocurrencies (by marketcap) use a copyleft license?
Assuming we would allow Monero and all other private digital currency competitors (because that’s what they are, we are competing for adoption and market share) to use any future technological advancements funded by ZEC holders, buyers, miners without any restrictions.
What exactly is the benefit for me holding/buying/mining ZEC? Am I just invested into a funding mechanism for ZK research / a privacy science project?
I hope not because I want ZEC to succeed, not Monero or Pirate Chain. Making it as hard as possible to copy-paste or atleast “time-gate” new breakthroughs until ZEC had time to gain adoption and awareness should be the way to go.
this is the elephant in the room, and it saddens it seems we don’t have community consensus on this simple question.
I vote in favour.
Yes, Monero community has been trolling Zcash for years, and often with fake arguments and no constructive approach. But are we on the same level? I don’t think so, Zcash community has always shown to have an open mindset and we just don’t hate other privacy coins.
Now with Halo 2 coming and John Dobbertin revelation, Monero community have to deal with the fact that Zcash has a superior technology. XMR maxis must also give up the theory that ZEC is a spin-off of NSA.
In my opinion, If XMR adopt ZKSnarks and Halo 2 it would be beneficial to Zcash too. It would eventually help adoption, somewhat like what happened with all the EVM compatible chains; they brought more popularity to Ethereum and the ecosystem benefited from it.
You are confused. Adoption is more people using Zcash.
with just one small difference, Etherum was the leader in the Space - Zcash is far behind Monero in terms of adoption!
this could mean that nobody that is using XMR would ever touch Zcash, or why would they?
the only solution that would fit is to give the licence to anyone after a few years.
code is not even on mainnet and they already want it and we all know why!
@sgp and @sethforprivacy both of you trashtalked zcash in the past and now you have the nuts to ask for this?
as someone that has his lifesavings invested in zcash i strongly recommend to not give it to the monero folks. we the zoddlers are the ones that are financing this project, please listen to the community or go and see the twitter profiles from all those guys. their intention is not good, all they want is to destroy zcash and now since there is nothing left to bash on they just copy the project and we get left behind!
they are playing with us! open your eyes!
