Topic: [ANN] Bitcoin Foundation - page 33. (Read 127621 times)

I was saying that the "mob rule" should not be used to undermine a voluntary collective. I was not supporting, or saying you should support the rule of a few. I was just saying the mob should not be used to control and regulate the few.

This contradicts your Executive Directors statement in regards to standards. You guys want to make standards for security and the Bitcoin protocol. You are asserting yourself in many ways, especially with your proposed certifications and the cost it takes for businesses to join.

Your foundation will eventually gain power if the industries within form trusts to control the message and force competitors out of its veil of legitimacy.

Bitcoin needs protection from the Powers That Be until it is successfully established.  Right now, bitcoin is weak, and needs as much protection as possible until it is thoroughly engrained, established within our world.  This is the same reason why Satoshi did not want wikileaks donations.

Think long game, people.

Bitcoin is a new, game-changing concept for the world.  It potentially means monetary freedom for millions (billions?).  We have had a decentralized world currency before -- gold -- but bitcoin has many features even gold does not provide.  You cannot memorize gold (brain wallet) and transport it with complete privacy.

Bitcoin is more stable than some real-world African fiat currencies.  Mobile phone technology is rapidly spreading across Africa, to even places where electricity and Internet do not reach.  Monetary freedom provided by bitcoin could transform lives in Africa today.

Bitcoin enables border-free remittances for near-zero cost, enabling rich Asian and Western countries to send their poorer relatives bitcoins -- less money for the Western Union middlemen, and more for your relatives.

Most of all, bitcoin is a truly unique, young gem of an experiment:  a currency (commodity?) supply that will slowly increase to 21M, then remain.  A decentralized currency, whose supply is validated by the global userbase and not adjusted at a whim by an elite few central bankers.

That experiment deserves time to take root and grow.

A heterogeneous mix of nation-state and decentralized currencies will provide a healthy check-and-balance ecosystem for world currencies.  With greater knowledge born of field experience and competition, each currency may learn from the other.

If the Bitcoin Foundation can buy bitcoin some time to get established, while staying true to the original Satoshi vision (decentralized, global, 21M), it seems worth it.  There is no objective evidence that any of the founding members have or want to deviate from Satoshi's vision.

A decentralized, join-if-you-like foundation works well, and is an established model proven successful in other open source projects like Tor or Linux.  If you have multiple parties who might have conflicts of interest, organizing a neutral entity is a logical step.  However kind, it is ethically questionable for Intel or AMD to directly pay Linus Torvalds' salary.  The Linux Foundation exists as a neutral entity, neutral ground where otherwise competitive interests meet for the good of the ecosystem.  It does not erase conflicts of interest, but does serve as an open, transparent body of action.

If any of us ever deviates from Satoshi's core vision... fire us.  Please.  Satoshi gave you the power.  Refuse to upgrade or choose a new client.  Vote with your feet, your computer and your wallet.

The problem with both you and shad0wbitz (which ive pointed out many times) is that you assume the foundation is assering itself, you assume we are wielding power which in fact we are not.

Its not a complicated structure to understand and you can create your own foundation to help further Bitcoin.

Foundation has no power or control, and no one owns the foundation its owned by you. Like I said, when elections come the whole board can be replaced and you can be on it

-Charlie

YES, and I must ad that somebody on my other thread supporting the foundation (I believe it was casascius) said he supported it because bankers, paypal, etc need "a hand to shake" .... This is at the end of the day the simple purpose of this foundation: to go against everything Bitcoin represents.

I was using a figure of speech of course, something your limited brain fails to grasp. IF Bitcoin had a state, this is it: it's constituents.

According to your statement, supporting the rule of the few and powerful against the "mob rule" is freedom fighting? You do understand basic structures of power and ruling right?

Some want to link Bitcoin with government interests. Some want it to be more easily leashed. We are against the potential authoritarians that can lead this organization and evolve Bitcoin into a form more akin to regular, regulated money.

Some of us will be against this all the way.

They have their rights to declare themselves as whatever they wish! There is no cyber bitcoin police to tell them to stop. All you can do is complain, whine, and not consider their declaration as valid.

How can you be a fucking "Freedom Defender" when you support the mob rule and fucking consider the Bitcoin Community as THE STATE! You think that being a member of the community means you're special? This community isn't the state! It's not Judicial, Legislative, nor Executive! It's a fucking group of people who use, contribute, and support bitcoin.

This community IS the Bitcoin state. Am I trying to limit freedoms? How about a group of few powerful players declaring they are "THE" Bitcoin foundation without any input from the actual Bitcoin community?

Perhaps paying a visit to the CIA to suck some establishment dick will earn me the noble tittle of "Freedom Defender"

He can still see me quoting you.

And whine we shall until our message is understood and heard.

Say no to hegemony. Say no to a one-sided, corporatist Bitcoin economy.

He can't actually limit anyone's right to form a collective or a development cabal. He's just whining that nobody in the foundation is doing what he wants.

You are trying to limit what people can and can't do with their bitcoins and their right to form a collective. You are the kind of person who is trying to shackle peoples' freedoms in the name of keeping bitcoin "pure" and holding up the bitcoin community as if it were the state.

It's not a conspiracy, it's history. Power corrupts and this organization wants power to standardize and be the main income source for bitcoin development.

The sad thing is if full power and legitimacy is reached in this organization, people like me will be rejected for being anti-government, terroristic loons if they start turning Bitcoin into a fiat currency.

This is an excellent suggestion. Hazek, you should start making plans to create competition but implement it only if or when Bitcoin Foundation shows signs of weakness. Of course the hardest part is to find and convince people to join you, but developers of alternative clients would be a good start.

I feel your pain.

MtGox is ALREADY blocking accounts of people that received what they considered "Tainted coins", with no legal authority to do so. So go figure... you are such a conspiracy theorist

Can you picture Chase freezing cash bills that they think might be involved on some crack cocaine deal?

And people wonder why we are butthurt.

I think it's good. Thanks a thousand for calling bitcoin "cryptographic money" instead of "cryptocurrency".

Did Mark donate his "bitcoin" trademark?

There are discussions of this in one of the other threads around here.  Great idea.  If I'm not drunk before my server comes back up (they say it is a multi-state outage, so don't hold your breath), I'll write a PHP script to fetch and compare signatures.  Actually, I think someone might have already posted one.

The problem is that all of the signatures and the binaries all come from the same shadowy cabal of secret developers that operate from their hidden lairs in the logged public IRC channel and logged public mailing list.