> You're missing the point here—we're grateful that people in the jailbreak community release things as FOSS, but the majority of jailbreaks as you yourself mention are not FOSS themselves, which is part of what motivated Chris, who proposed the prize, and myself.
In other places you've stated the reason he wanted this prize was to get software on his iPhone so he could help with some accessibility issues. This is an incentive that aligns with long-term open hardware, not short term open software. You can't have it both ways. If you are really dropping all of the incentive arguments I'm making and want to concentrate on open source, that's fine: but let's get our stories straight.
> It seems to me that that opensn0w campaign may have been fake (there are a lot of those on IndieGoGo).
I just contacted the developer of opensn0w: no, that was not fake, it just didn't take off. I personally can assert to you that opensn0w (which many people are using right now) is not itself a fake (and I'm one of the people who generally are asked to determine this ;P).
> And to be clear, in talking to friends in the security space, the auditing the code aspect was a huge concern, so I'm glad we can at least agree on something. :)
I talked about auditing changes, not auditing code, and I even explicitly stated that the code was not in any way a concern to someone who really knows what they are doing, so no: we don't really agree on this :/. I have on many occasions, in articles and talks, made the argument that open source is overrated, and that what really matters is open hardware: that in addition to the gap between source code and machine code decreasing over time due to better analysis tools and frameworks, that as long as hardware is capable of being closed off it doesn't matter how much of the code is open <- the iOS jailbreak community is at the front line of this particular battle.
> We're also planning on helping to fund many open hardware projects, and I'll actually be speaking at the SF Hardware Startup meetup tonight to solicit ideas from the community.
FWIW, having third-parties construct open hardware doesn't really help the cause of forcing large companies who make closed hardware to provide means of opening it; that said, I do appreciate that you have future goals, but it may have been more useful to start with them.
In other places you've stated the reason he wanted this prize was to get software on his iPhone so he could help with some accessibility issues. This is an incentive that aligns with long-term open hardware, not short term open software. You can't have it both ways. If you are really dropping all of the incentive arguments I'm making and want to concentrate on open source, that's fine: but let's get our stories straight.
> It seems to me that that opensn0w campaign may have been fake (there are a lot of those on IndieGoGo).
I just contacted the developer of opensn0w: no, that was not fake, it just didn't take off. I personally can assert to you that opensn0w (which many people are using right now) is not itself a fake (and I'm one of the people who generally are asked to determine this ;P).
> And to be clear, in talking to friends in the security space, the auditing the code aspect was a huge concern, so I'm glad we can at least agree on something. :)
I talked about auditing changes, not auditing code, and I even explicitly stated that the code was not in any way a concern to someone who really knows what they are doing, so no: we don't really agree on this :/. I have on many occasions, in articles and talks, made the argument that open source is overrated, and that what really matters is open hardware: that in addition to the gap between source code and machine code decreasing over time due to better analysis tools and frameworks, that as long as hardware is capable of being closed off it doesn't matter how much of the code is open <- the iOS jailbreak community is at the front line of this particular battle.
> We're also planning on helping to fund many open hardware projects, and I'll actually be speaking at the SF Hardware Startup meetup tonight to solicit ideas from the community.
FWIW, having third-parties construct open hardware doesn't really help the cause of forcing large companies who make closed hardware to provide means of opening it; that said, I do appreciate that you have future goals, but it may have been more useful to start with them.