Topic: [ANN] Bitcoin Foundation - page 54. (Read 127621 times)

I think this is a great development. It has the potential to be very useful for spreading Bitcoin.

I supported the idea in the past so I'm it is really glad it is actually happening now.

As coincidence would have it I have been developing a Bitcoin boardgame in the last few days with a "Bitcoin Foundation" as one of its components. 

And I am fine with that, but let's call it the "Let's pay Gavin's nut" foundation, not the "Bitcoin Foundation"

would be cool if they link to all the already existing nonprofit bitcoin foundations out there ... to emphasize the p2p networking aspect and so on.

Bitcoin as we know it, and as it was devised by Satoshi will ALWAYS be against the interests of the modern, blood sucking state, period. They will never be allies unless Bitcoin becomes Paypal and tax accountability is in place. This is just a fact. Why do you think Satoshi was so particular about his anonymity? Because he thought he could "mainstream" Bitcoin?

Very well. I understand your concern for big misunderstanding. However, I think they are overblown.


Sure it does, but they are weak or insignificant or they have become part of the HTML5 army. Think of android, for example, they have lot of powerful enemies.

IF the bitcoin foundation can convert enemies to allies, it will done quite well for itself. Even if the bitcoin foundation is only used to fund Gavin, it would be worth it.

Firstly,

MtGox and BitInstant are listed there because they are the first corporate members. You are more than welcome to join as well. In fact, if you own 1 BTC then you are a profiteer as well when the price goes up.

Second, BitInstant and myself had no involvment with the DCAO other than Matt inviting me to it (like every other Bitcoin business owner was) and putting my name on the website..which I asked him to take down many times.

The foundation is extremely democratic. All you have to do is join for the smallest membership and you can be on the board as well by voting, the same way the other board members are on it.

We've spent hunreds of thousands of dollars and speak to regulators, goverment officials, corporate execs, ect. They all agreed that a foundation neds to be in place for Bitcoin to succeed.

No one owns the foundation, and board seats are not for life. Anyone can run the foundation, just like Bitcoin it runs itself.


Not sure why Theymos was not involved in this. Gavin invited us all in here, and has nothing to do with owning/running a business.

Forsure Theymos should be involved, thats why Peter wrote in his letter we are looking for an exec director and other positions.


Another error of yours. Patrick is my lawyer not MtGox's. He has donated his time for free to work for the foundation and I have spent alot of money training Patrick on the laws and regulatory structure of Bitcoin.

He is the most well versed for the job and he is doing it for free.

Please get your facts straight.



Satoshi is in the bylaws of the foundation and the founding member.

Before making statements, please verify you have all the information as I've mentioned before.

-Charlie

If they invite you, would you accept being part of it?

A very good point.  And I would suggest that correcting this oversight become the first high priority project.

I suggest two seats just for mining, with voting decided in the coinbase rather than creating a third category of membership.

+1 THIS. This goes about the very spirit of Bitcoin and its founder. These corporate identities want to make Bitcoin into the next PayPal under the disguise of a "foundation".

Imagine USA declares bitcoin illegal and asks the foundation based in this country to leak all the users joined database. All we are now early adopters but, if the foundation becomes the "face" of bitcoin is quite probable that all the newbies will join in there and loose their anonimity.

Imagine the foundation starts buying patents and creation rights from the bitcoin universe.

Perfect, name it "Gavin Foundation" then. I'm fine with that.

He, you just made me realize that Satoshi himself wouldn't be able to be a member of it, if he wants to preserve his anonymity.

So, the Gates Foundation invented gates?  The Rockerfeller Foundation invented Rockerfellers?

I am trying to figure out if you are being facetious or are you trying to be serious. There is a sea of difference between an individual owning a couple of coins and profiting from perhaps speculations to a foundation who's board is controlled by the biggest monolithic structure in this industry: MtGox and BitInstant. They even share lawyers for Pete's sake! How is this a good idea? Am I missing something here?

And is such formalization necessary? The potential for misunderstandings is big there.
If this was named "Gavin's Bitcoin Development Group" I'd probably be perfectly fine with it. "Bitcoin Foundation" is a lie in its own name, and will certainly provoke misunderstandings.


HTML5 doesn't have enemies. And HTML5 is not really significant to me, so I just don't care. About Bitcoin I do care though.

And of course the announcement of the month that I desperately wanted to be first to the press with happens at 3AM while I'm sound asleep.

Damn morning people.

+1 to this idea!

I'm happy with the board selection.

Exactly my point. Why aren't you on the board? You have been as instrumental (if not more) to Bitcoin than Charlie Shrem or Mark for that fact. I guess you have to run a highly profitable bitcoin business to be considered for the position.

Does a PO box count as a "real address"?

How is the Founder board seat given away?