[ANN] Bitcoin Foundation - page 34. | Bitcointalksearch.org

shad0wbitz

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

Quote from: boonies4u on September 28, 2012, 01:06:57 PM

- FACT: The decision of forming "The Bitcoin Fundation" was made by a few powerful players without no input from the community.
Oh no! Powerful people not asking permission to do what they want!
Oh No! DO what you want, but don't call it THE Bitcoin Foundation...
- FACT: The board of the foundation was elected under close door, without any input from the community.
Oh no! The board of the foundation is actually THE BOARD OF THE FOUNDATION.
I am sorry ... WHAT??
- FACT: Two members of the foundation own and/or operate the largest for profit corporations in the Bitcoin Industry: MTGOX AND BITINSTANT.
Oh no! What an obvious conflict of interest! MtGox and BitInstant totally want bitcoin to fail.
MtGox and BitInstant want MtGox and BitInstant to succeed. Perhaps you should read about for-profit corporations.
- FACT: The foundation's attorney is the same attorney than Bitinstant. A CLEAR conflict of interests.
In all seriousness I believe this was addressed earlier.

Where?
- FACT: The bylaws and other articles of the foundation weren't made public until yesterday, and only because of the public outcry of the community.
Oh no! They did so many evil things before the bylaws were released!
- FACT: There was no democratic, open, free process that decided if there was a need for a foundation, or who should lead and seat said on the board of directors.
Oh no! The bitcoin community isn't a democracy!
You seem to be pleased about that?

Atlas

jr. member

Activity: 56

Merit: 1

Quote from: shad0wbitz on September 28, 2012, 01:17:43 PM

Quote from: Atlas on September 27, 2012, 06:18:11 PM

Not if evil is redefined over time by The Bitcoin Foundation and people accept the message.

It already started, we now are the conspiracy theorists, the failed business man that pretend to be the little guy, the guy that "must have some beef" and is trolling, etc.. etc..

Gavin, Shrem, Vorhees, Mark, they are the owners of Bitcoin, and how you dare disagree with them?

Imagine: The executive director announces that The Bitcoin Foundation will be making a public-private partnership with the government, to help aid in justice for money laundering, drug trafficking and other financial crime. Please download this new implementation to help us catch criminals and retrieve stolen funds.

The_Duke

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Lead Core BitKitty Developer

Quote from: Herodes on September 28, 2012, 01:13:59 PM

Quote from: hazek on September 28, 2012, 12:54:17 PM

The main danger is if the community trusts such an organization too much. For example- if everyone assumed the client version put out by the organization was trustworthy, then there is serious danger. A group as you propose should probably exist, but the community should remain skeptical of it, and always constructively critical.

I thought of the exact same thing, now is the time to make one or more services which sole purpose is to constantly review the downloadable official client for changes, and alternative clients too. As long as these checks are in place, it should be difficult to sneak in backdoors. Such checks are no distrust, but rather a salute to the current developers, and the very nature of bitcoin.

And then if some person doing these checks turns out to spend an awful lot of time on it, he will end up having to make a Bitcoin Foundation Foundation, in order to raise money and have his salary paid by it, so he can do it fulltime. After which we will have to cry out at the fact that people who did something good initially (checking the dev's code), now have gone ego-crazy and started an undemocratic foundation that claims to be THE organisation that checks the dev's code! Then someone would have to start checking the work of the code checkers, until it starts taking him so much time that....

shad0wbitz

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

Quote from: Atlas on September 27, 2012, 06:18:11 PM

Not if evil is redefined over time by The Bitcoin Foundation and people accept the message.

It already started, we now are the conspiracy theorists, the failed business man that pretend to be the little guy, the guy that "must have some beef" and is trolling, etc.. etc..

Gavin, Shrem, Vorhees, Mark, they are the owners of Bitcoin, and how you dare disagree with them?

Herodes

hero member

Activity: 868

Merit: 1000

Quote from: hazek on September 28, 2012, 12:54:17 PM

The main danger is if the community trusts such an organization too much. For example- if everyone assumed the client version put out by the organization was trustworthy, then there is serious danger. A group as you propose should probably exist, but the community should remain skeptical of it, and always constructively critical.

I thought of the exact same thing, now is the time to make one or more services which sole purpose is to constantly review the downloadable official client for changes, and alternative clients too. As long as these checks are in place, it should be difficult to sneak in backdoors. Such checks are no distrust, but rather a salute to the current developers, and the very nature of bitcoin.

kiba

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1020

Quote from: boonies4u on September 28, 2012, 01:09:16 PM

I meant him ACTUALLY doing it.

I don't think Gavin is going to waste his time. Beside, Mark Karpeles totally want his business.

boonies4u

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Polvos on September 28, 2012, 01:07:17 PM

Quote from: boonies4u on September 28, 2012, 12:55:54 PM

I would like to see Gavin reject hazek's bitcoin. Roll Eyes

It's easy. Even he doesn't need to change the protocol code. Gavin only has to include some hazeks purchased coins through the MtGox exchanger to some tainted coin list and "improving the newcomers experience" by tweaking the satoshi client in order to reject the tainted ones (returning autometically them to the sending address and warning the user)

I meant him ACTUALLY doing it.

Polvos

hero member

Activity: 597

Merit: 500

Quote from: boonies4u on September 28, 2012, 12:55:54 PM

I would like to see Gavin reject hazek's bitcoin. Roll Eyes

It's easy. Even he doesn't need to change the protocol code. Gavin only has to include some hazeks purchased coins through the MtGox exchanger to some tainted coin list running in the Bitcoin Foundation and "improving the newcomers experience" by tweaking the satoshi client offered there in order to reject the tainted ones (returning autometically them to the sending address and warning the user)

boonies4u

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 1000

Quote from: shad0wbitz on September 28, 2012, 12:55:11 PM

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on September 28, 2012, 11:51:15 AM

I'm not going to address conspiracy theories, mostly because I'm not seeing most of them because of who I've got on my ignore list.

- FACT: The decision of forming "The Bitcoin Fundation" was made by a few powerful players without no input from the community.
Oh no! Powerful people not asking permission to do what they want!
- FACT: The board of the foundation was elected under close door, without any input from the community.
Oh no! The board of the foundation is actually THE BOARD OF THE FOUNDATION.
- FACT: Two members of the foundation own and/or operate the largest for profit corporations in the Bitcoin Industry: MTGOX AND BITINSTANT.
Oh no! What an obvious conflict of interest! MtGox and BitInstant totally want bitcoin to fail.
- FACT: The foundation's attorney is the same attorney than Bitinstant. A CLEAR conflict of interests.
In all seriousness I believe this was addressed earlier.
- FACT: The bylaws and other articles of the foundation weren't made public until yesterday, and only because of the public outcry of the community.
Oh no! They did so many evil things before the bylaws were released!
- FACT: There was no democratic, open, free process that decided if there was a need for a foundation, or who should lead and seat said on the board of directors.
Oh no! The bitcoin community isn't a democracy!

Guys I think The Bitcoin Foundation is up to some shady stuff! Totally!

shad0wbitz

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

Quote from: Atlas on September 28, 2012, 12:57:50 PM

Quote from: hazek on September 28, 2012, 12:54:17 PM

Hey Erik, why the change of heart?:

Because he rather be the power than fight it.

+1, and because he is known to flip like a pancake, generally speaking in the direction that power/money blows. READ: letter to MNW.

Atlas

jr. member

Activity: 56

Merit: 1

Quote from: flatfly on September 28, 2012, 01:02:16 PM

Quote from: vess on September 27, 2012, 05:46:06 PM

Finally, I can confirm that Satoshi is a Founding Member. That is all.

Seems that this little statement by vess hasn't deserved the attention it should have! Does it mean what I think it means, ie, contact with Satoshi has been made recently?

No. Judging by his previous statements, he would hate this facade more than anything that has been proposed.

Satoshi probably thinks Bitcoin is on the wrong path right now, starting with Gavin going to the CIA.

shad0wbitz

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

Quote from: hazek on September 28, 2012, 12:41:27 PM

The problem I have with this Foundation is that it asserted itself over this experiment and the community. No one asked you to. No one gave you permission. You just did it. You created a corporation to wield power no one granted you.

THIS! HEAR HEAR!

flatfly

legendary

Activity: 1092

Merit: 1016

760930

Quote from: vess on September 27, 2012, 05:46:06 PM

Finally, I can confirm that Satoshi is a Founding Member. That is all.

Seems that this little statement by vess hasn't deserved the attention it should have! Does it mean what I think it means, ie, contact with Satoshi has been made recently?

Atlas

jr. member

Activity: 56

Merit: 1

Quote from: hazek on September 28, 2012, 12:54:17 PM

Hey Erik, why the change of heart?:

Because he rather be the power than fight it.

boonies4u

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 1000

Quote from: kiba on September 28, 2012, 12:47:52 PM

Quote from: hazek on September 28, 2012, 12:41:27 PM

\\
The problem I have with this Foundation is that it asserted itself over this experiment and the community. No one asked you to. No one gave you permission. You just did it. You created a corporation to wield power no one granted you.

So what? Anybody is free to create a corporation or a charity that support bitcoin. They don't need damn permission from you.

Quote

I wouldn't have a shred of a problem if you were a for profit business dependent on voluntary transactions which merely contracted with Gavin and his team. But you aren't and he is a board member inherently always with a conflict of interest. And saying I can start my own Foundation is disingenuous at best since you know I can't be the one that pays Gavin or his team and have the same power as you do.

So having influences and fame is power. I guess being a rich bitcoiner is having power too. I guess we should equalize everyone's power.

I would like to see Gavin reject hazek's bitcoin. Roll Eyes

shad0wbitz

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on September 28, 2012, 11:51:15 AM

I'm not going to address conspiracy theories, mostly because I'm not seeing most of them because of who I've got on my ignore list.

Apparently according to Gavin, pointing out facts now makes you a conspiracy theorist. That is, if you are lucky enough not to be on the ignore list of the Lord of Bitcoin.

Well here are some irrefutable facts about this Foundation:

- FACT: The decision of forming "The Bitcoin Fundation" was made by a few powerful players with no input from the community.
- FACT: The board of the foundation was elected under close doors, without any input from the community.
- FACT: Two members of the foundation own and/or operate the largest for profit corporations in the Bitcoin Industry: MTGOX AND BITINSTANT.
- FACT: The foundation's attorney is the same attorney than Bitinstant. A CLEAR conflict of interests.
- FACT: The bylaws and other articles of the foundation weren't made public until yesterday, and only because of the public outcry of the community.
- FACT: There was no democratic, open, free process that decided if there was a need for a foundation, or who should lead and seat said on the board of directors.

This is a BAD IDEA and should be boycotted. Satoshi never intended to "mainstream" Bitcoin. At least not this way. By Gavin's own admission, he stopped all communications with the community and disappeared the day Gavin told him he was visiting the CIA.

It is time for the Bitcoin community to decide if they want this wonderful project to be packaged and sold to the establishment or not.

Shad0w

hazek

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1003

Hey Erik, why the change of heart?:

Quote from: evoorhees on October 25, 2011, 03:48:28 PM

Gavin - seems like a reasonable idea.

Bitcoin would still have all the advantages of being decentralized (no central server, no office to raid and shut down. etc), but gets the added advantages of a core organization to guide it. Perhaps the core organization will get destroyed by the evil powers, but I'm not sure that'd be incredibly damaging to Bitcoin as a protocol. The community would just grow a new command center when the old was destroyed.

The main danger is if the community trusts such an organization too much. For example- if everyone assumed the client version put out by the organization was trustworthy, then there is serious danger. A group as you propose should probably exist, but the community should remain skeptical of it, and always constructively critical.

Quote from: evoorhees on October 25, 2011, 03:57:36 PM

After a few mins of more thinking...

Perhaps the idea of an "official" group is not wise. Instead, the core dev team could create an organization, with special logo and name. This organization would be the de facto official group, but only so long as it held up its reputation. At all times, other groups can form and compete for "de facto officialness."

In essence then, this would just be a Non-profit, spontaneously organized by individuals. If multiple such organizations sprout up, then each community member can support whomever they wish.

Think of it like a market for competing representatives. No group official by law, but any group official by market sentiment. We would see one group come to dominate the sentiment, but Bitcoin would not be irrevocably tied to it.

No group should be granted an explicit monopoly... but an implicit market-derived monopoly would not bother me.

And today:

Quote from: evoorhees on September 28, 2012, 10:58:32 AM

"Warning - while you were reading 193 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post."

LOL

For the record, I LOVE that the Foundation exists now. I think this is a huge positive step for Bitcoin. Few negatives, plenty of positives. I also understand the concern many people feel - we should always be diligent and skeptical of anyone trying to be "the face" of Bitcoin. But in this case specifically, and to the extent this Foundation can act in certain manners for certain goals, I think it's a very legitimate development and I'll be joining as a paying member here soon.

acoindr

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1002

Quote from: Polvos on September 28, 2012, 12:45:26 PM

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on September 28, 2012, 11:51:15 AM

Thanks for all the positive, constructive feedback (those of you who gave positive, constructive feedback). I'm not going to address conspiracy theories, mostly because I'm not seeing most of them because of who I've got on my ignore list.

[...]

Because I'm pragmatic. I like to actually get things accomplished instead of endlessly talking about doing things. Everybody on the initial Board are people who get things done.

My biggest fear is not that the Foundation will become some massively powerful entity controlling Bitcoin;

Drop the ring Gavin. Let it get melted in the Mount Doom.

LMAO If only this were a laughing matter. The behavior I'm seeing is frankly worrying.

kiba

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1020

Quote from: hazek on September 28, 2012, 12:41:27 PM

\\
The problem I have with this Foundation is that it asserted itself over this experiment and the community. No one asked you to. No one gave you permission. You just did it. You created a corporation to wield power no one granted you.

So what? Anybody is free to create a corporation or a charity that support bitcoin. They don't need damn permission from you.

Quote

I wouldn't have a shred of a problem if you were a for profit business dependent on voluntary transactions which merely contracted with Gavin and his team. But you aren't and he is a board member inherently always with a conflict of interest. And saying I can start my own Foundation is disingenuous at best since you know I can't be the one that pays Gavin or his team and have the same power as you do.

So having influences and fame is power. I guess being a rich bitcoiner is having power too. I guess we should equalize everyone's power.

S3052

legendary

Activity: 2100

Merit: 1000

I like the foundation idea overall.

Just one question: What are the benefits and rights for an individual member? I can not afford a business membership but consider a individual membership. But before doing that I need to know what the benefits are.

thanks for anwering

Topic: [ANN] Bitcoin Foundation - page 34. (Read 127621 times)