Ithink there’s something funny going on with regard to this sudden drama regarding kewbit and his development of a network agnostic haveno client. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that this happens exactly when reto decides to clean all reference to haveno out of their network. Could be, but I don’t think so.
So, Reto has basically no fees right now. They don’t really benefit financially from being the only haveno network with liquidity. Yet, it does seem that they do want to have a monopoly position within our community. Why? They benefit in some way. If you don’t pay with money…
I’ve always been a proponent using my little voice in our miscellaneous community spaces for reto, using the network with the liquidity, allowing competition to emerge organically, being OK with them being the big one as long as they serve the community honestly, and of being cautious with new haveno networks that pop up overnight. But this is entirely different than those things. Reto is actively trying to monopolize haveno and therefore the decentralized xmr <-> fiat gateway. This isn’t some people saying “who is hardenedsteel? Do we trust them?” This is Reto removing reference to haveno and a sudden controversy around the person that is developing a multi network Haveno client, going hard and trying to get them drummed out of the community. And they’re doing it for 0% fees, which tells me they’re after something else, and the only something else there that I can see is XMR users’ data.
I don’t know if kewbit is an asshole, annoying, acts like a child or any of the accusations against him lately. But I do know, we need competing haveno networks. We have literally forked away our entire currency network twice because we believe in what we are building so strongly we would not allow even network effects to stop us. Multiple haveno networks needs to be a top short term priority in this community, we are at a potentially dangerous point in development of a decentralized fiat exchange and preventing one group of arbitrators from controlling that is absolutely vital, regardless whether their intentions are benign or not.
Edit: looked into some details that I was not aware of, and have come to the same conclusion most of the community is coming to: this kewbit fellow is jerking us around. I still think it is important to have competing haveno networks, and a haveno client that supports multiple, and I’m still put off by the retoswap rebrand, but I am now convinced that this kewbit drama is exactly what it looks like at face value. It looks to me actually he is trying to hostile takeover the haveno brand.
Nice conspiracy theory, sadly falls apart when you realize the only reason there is any drama at all is because Kewbit doesn’t make his code public.
After Kewbit threatened to remove Reto from Haveno.com due to an argument with me (lol?), it also makes a lot of sense that they want to reduce exposure to that name.
multiple haveno networks needs to be a top short term priority
I really disagree. Haveno is already a decentralized p2p network. We don’t have multiple different Monero mainnets to “improve decentralization”. Bisq has been around for a decade, there is a reason why nobody ever set up a second Bisq network.
Man, let me ask you, are you a reto arbitrator? Not to question your motive, I just don’t know and am wondering why he would remove reto from haveno.com over an argument with you.
I understand the drama stems from real concerns. The guy isn’t exactly the easiest guy to get along with, but the same is true of many of the more brash personalities in the xmr world. He is being difficult as hell, that is not something I’m disputing.
(Edit: “difficult as hell” is an understatement. I’ve since learned more and this kewbit dude is jerking the community around and shouldn’t be trusted. Conspiracy theory confirmed, you’re right monerobull. The rest is left unedited because I still have concerns about monopolization of haveno liquidity and for record.)
You disagree, but it’s not the same as a separate Monero network, being an arbitrator on a haveno network is not permissionless. There might not be a centralized point in the reto network infrastructure wise, but the fact that the arbitrator set and haveno network fees are set by them means there’s an organizational centralization, just like bisq. I think it’s a great thing to have competition on that, is very important and that software that makes that less difficult for the user is needed.
I have always liked reto, have always been cautious in jumping to conclusions about them, you can find my small part of many discussions here, on the simplex group, reddit, nostr, always being clear headed about it and never calling them any names or telling people not to use reto. But this change to “retoswap”, you may be right that they don’t like kewbit and so are trying to distance themselves from the haveno name so that they don’t have to count on him, but calling my curiosity and concern a conspiracy theory, people in this community know very well that that term was created to shut down discussion. I don’t think it’s far fetched to say “the reto network currently has a de facto monopoly and would probably like to keep it that way.”
but bisq did create mechanisms to improve its own network’s decentralization like the BSQ token, so that it is operated by a DAO, while Haveno is decentralized and p2p on the trader’s network but not on the contributor’s network (top vs bottom from the bisq doc’s illustration)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNvOZlIDYEQ
I don’t have any reason to question the reto team for now but I also think there should be multiple contributor networks and easy to switch from a single app
And we can use other resources as well. Instant crypto exchanges, like Exolir or simpleswap, CEXes, etc. Haveno is not the one exchange for Monero
It is the most valuable that we have.
It may be reto stupidity not malice when not properly acknowledging haveno as the engine that powers retoswap
You could be right. Truth is they’ve been good participants in the community, I have no reason to believe they’re up to anything, but I am a cautious person, naturally suspicious even, as are most people drawn to XMR.
Yea i remember the period when localmonero was shutting down and haveno was being touted as the alternative. Haveno reto became the only functioning instance, i tried 1 other but it was empty. Thus by network effect /early adoption reto got a monopoly. Even though the ideal case - many haveno networks competing - is not true i think that we arent in a great position.
All that said, coders dont work for free and a decentralised xmr fiat exch is a big ask to be funded by piecemeal donation or tiny fee acumulation. So retos what weve got for now but its rebrand is bad pr.
Ps. We use tradeogre without knowing the dox or codebase. . .
