[ANN] Bitcoin Foundation - page 9. | Bitcointalksearch.org

EhVedadoOAnonimato

hero member

Activity: 630

Merit: 500

Quote from: Insu Dra on October 03, 2012, 07:00:31 AM

In the end The Foundation will be there to please those that pay and not to protect or advance the protocol.

I think this kind of critic doesn't stand.

There's nothing stopping people with deep pockets from financing developments that please them right now. This organization per se won't make it easier or harder for them.
In the end, what matters is who people (=bitcoin users) trust. If well intended developers see the foundation has been bought by "an evil guy", they can simply leave it. Their reputation will leave with them.

The actual danger is not people buying up the organization. The actual danger is bitcoin users trusting this organization more than they should. The simple fact they don't accept anonymous memberships is already a reason to be wary, IMHO.

EhVedadoOAnonimato

hero member

Activity: 630

Merit: 500

Quote from: eb3full on October 03, 2012, 05:50:15 AM

You simply cannot have a "1 person 1 vote" system that allows anonymous donation.

Why having a "1 person 1 vote" system? Those who donate more should get a louder voice, that's much fairer.
If you think otherwise you probably have some aversion against money/profit/rich people or any other sort of distorted value that goes against the ideal of free market money which Bitcoin represents.

EDIT: Plus, "1 person 1 vote" systems are more prone to the "public choice problem" described in the following video, since individual members' losses from a bad ruling tend to be too insignificant for them to bother acting against it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgJ644LPL6g
An organization in which some parties have a higher "share" is less susceptible since these parties would suffer a greater loss from the "distributed cost", so they may be motivated to act.
Not that any of this is of major relevance since this organization is voluntary and people may leave at any moment anyway.

kjj

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1026

Quote from: Insu Dra on October 03, 2012, 07:00:31 AM

Quote from: kjj on October 03, 2012, 06:40:35 AM

We really need a full alternative, TBF independent, client. Asap.

+1k

Woah! I didn't say that. Please attribute that quote to the right person. Here is the original reference:

Quote from: The_Duke on October 03, 2012, 01:29:45 AM

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on October 02, 2012, 06:36:29 PM

if the membership agrees with your "bugs" then they'll get fixed.

I'm happy that I'd already made a post in the Alternative client section, because if I hadn't I would have to do it now.

What you're saying here is that if something needs fixing (be it in bitcoind, TBF's setup, or other), it will only happen if enough paying members want it. So if something needs fixing that might not be beneficial to enough paying members (even if it is vital to the majority of the userbase that is not a member), it won't get done.

We really need a full alternative, TBF independent, client. Asap.

For what it's worth, I think that we need a whole bunch of alternative clients. The difference is that I think they'll just show up as bitcoin grows, and I've thought that way since way before the start of the foundation.

Insu Dra

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

Quote from: kjj on October 03, 2012, 06:40:35 AM

Quote from: The_Duke on October 03, 2012, 01:29:45 AM

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on October 02, 2012, 06:36:29 PM

if the membership agrees with your "bugs" then they'll get fixed.

I'm happy that I'd already made a post in the Alternative client section, because if I hadn't I would have to do it now.

What you're saying here is that if something needs fixing (be it in bitcoind, TBF's setup, or other), it will only happen if enough paying members want it. So if something needs fixing that might not be beneficial to enough paying members (even if it is vital to the majority of the userbase that is not a member), it won't get done.

We really need a full alternative, TBF independent, client. Asap.

See, this is why we call you a troll.

In the case of the foundation, the decision about whether something is broken or not belongs to the members. You don't get to decide that something in the foundation's bylaws is broken and needs to be fixed, the members do. If the members don't think that something needs to be changed, it isn't broken, no matter how much you think it is.

So it all comes down to members that pay, eventually those that pay the most will have most power. Equal votes my ass, they pay the bills and put food on the table ...

In the end The Foundation will be there to please those that pay and not to protect or advance the protocol.

The more I read and hear about this the more I'm tempted to just remove any software related to the foundation ... if only that was possible.

Quote from: kjj on October 03, 2012, 06:40:35 AM

We really need a full alternative, TBF independent, client. Asap.

+1k

cunicula

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1003

Quote from: eb3full on October 03, 2012, 05:50:15 AM

Not only is Gavin unlikely to humor this, it's a very disingenuous comparison. Bitcoin is at risk of a single malicious party which must afford to scale their attack against everybody else in the network, at direct opposition to the market incentive to act as an honest party. Not only is there not a market incentive to act as an honest voter in the foundation, the entry rates (2.5btc) are static and do not change based on the demand of new participants.

You simply cannot have a "1 person 1 vote" system that allows anonymous donation. Since they actually want their foundation to have credibility, they've made the right decision.

This is a completely valid comparison. People will lobby the foundation because of their private economic interest. Incentives to buy votes scale with the value of bitcoin just like incentives to invest in mining equipment. In both situations, the interests of lobbyists/miners will not fully coincide with those of bitcoin owners.

I'm not against a foundation; just like I'm not against a mining monopoly. Both are improvements over the status quo. An organization dominated by special interests is better than no organization at all. A robust democratic institution instead of one based on vote buying would be far preferable. (i.e. one coin of ownership = one vote, not one coin donated to vote buying = one vote)

Rothgar

sr. member

Activity: 374

Merit: 250

Tune in to Neocash Radio

Quote from: EhVedadoOAnonimato on October 03, 2012, 05:16:53 AM

Don't care about supporting an organization whose name is a lie in itself and will likely mislead people - with the high probability of this being intentional.

Damn that national science foundation, and their monopoly on science.

ShadowOfHarbringer

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1006

Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on October 02, 2012, 06:36:29 PM

Name: I like the name. It can be changed if the membership decides on something better.

OK, this is actually a [minor] bug.

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on October 02, 2012, 06:36:29 PM

Hosting company: could easily be changed; it likely will be.

Well, since this is kind of a [critical] bug, it better be. Soon.

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on October 02, 2012, 06:36:29 PM

I highly doubt Cloudflare is a government honeypot for anything besides catching DDoS botnet operators.

Still, it will be much easier for the government & FEDs to get their hands on the servers, since the company already cooperates deeply with the authorities.

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on October 02, 2012, 06:36:29 PM

Identities/voting: Please see "Sybil Attack" for why we're requiring names, mailing addresses and emails. If you've got a magical way of identifying anonymous people please send me the source code, I could use it for the Bitcoin Faucet.

Actually, i do have a not-so-magical way for confirming one's identity, however it will not work for the Faucet.

Simply, if somebody wants to confirm his identity, he needs to meet one of existing, trusted foundation members in public place. And then use PGP/GPG to verify that it is the same person, which has registered on the foundation's website & on Bitcoin forums. This is a 100% sybil attack-proof procedure. Also, it provides high level of protection against government collecting all information about "Bitcoin dissidents" just by hacking/taking over the servers or even torturing/blackmailing people.

Yeah, i know this will be problematic, but you can charge additional BTC for it. Severity of this bug is [critical]. Possibility of government action against Bitcoin cannot be ignored.

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on October 02, 2012, 06:36:29 PM

US based: if Patrick (Foundation's lawyer) was Finnish we would probably be Finnish-based. That's the whole "perfect is the enemy of the good" thing (and I really don't want to have a month-long discussion about which legal jurisdiction is the least likely to declare Bitcoin Foundation illegal, which would be best for getting donors tax deductions, and whatever other arguments we could have).

The fear of US is well deserved... after all it US that has FED, it is US that jailed Kim Dotcom without charges, it is US that pushes for Assange's extradition even though he didn't break any laws in his country and it is US that has Guantanamo concentration camp, where they can hold & torture you indefinately without due process or even any charges.

Severity: [critical].

kjj

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1026

Quote from: The_Duke on October 03, 2012, 01:29:45 AM

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on October 02, 2012, 06:36:29 PM

if the membership agrees with your "bugs" then they'll get fixed.

I'm happy that I'd already made a post in the Alternative client section, because if I hadn't I would have to do it now.

What you're saying here is that if something needs fixing (be it in bitcoind, TBF's setup, or other), it will only happen if enough paying members want it. So if something needs fixing that might not be beneficial to enough paying members (even if it is vital to the majority of the userbase that is not a member), it won't get done.

We really need a full alternative, TBF independent, client. Asap.

See, this is why we call you a troll.

In the case of the foundation, the decision about whether something is broken or not belongs to the members. You don't get to decide that something in the foundation's bylaws is broken and needs to be fixed, the members do. If the members don't think that something needs to be changed, it isn't broken, no matter how much you think it is.

Kupsi

legendary

Activity: 1193

Merit: 1003

9.9.2012: I predict that single digits... <- FAIL

Quote from: The_Duke on October 03, 2012, 05:51:44 AM

Quote from: gyverlb on October 03, 2012, 04:36:45 AM

Quote from: The_Duke on October 03, 2012, 01:29:45 AM

We really need a full alternative, TBF independent, client. Asap.

Wouldn't you have the very same hypothetical problems with the developers of the alternative client?

As soon as they set up something as broken as TBF, then yes.

Why don't you start a new organization for developing the alternative client?

Mobius

hero member

Activity: 988

Merit: 1000

Quote from: The_Duke on October 03, 2012, 01:29:45 AM

We really need a full alternative, TBF independent, client. Asap.

+1

The_Duke

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Lead Core BitKitty Developer

Quote from: gyverlb on October 03, 2012, 04:36:45 AM

Quote from: The_Duke on October 03, 2012, 01:29:45 AM

We really need a full alternative, TBF independent, client. Asap.

Wouldn't you have the very same hypothetical problems with the developers of the alternative client?

As soon as they set up something as broken as TBF, then yes.

eb3full

vip

Activity: 198

Merit: 101

Quote from: EhVedadoOAnonimato on October 03, 2012, 05:16:53 AM

Bitcoin mining itself faces the same "risk", with a much greater impact in case it happens.

Not only is Gavin unlikely to humor this, it's a very disingenuous comparison. Bitcoin is at risk of a single malicious party which must afford to scale their attack against everybody else in the network, at direct opposition to the market incentive to act as an honest party. Not only is there not a market incentive to act as an honest voter in the foundation, the entry rates (2.5btc) are static and do not change based on the demand of new participants.

You simply cannot have a "1 person 1 vote" system that allows anonymous donation. Since they actually want their foundation to have credibility, they've made the right decision.

EhVedadoOAnonimato

hero member

Activity: 630

Merit: 500

Quote from: vuce on October 03, 2012, 04:58:03 AM

bitcoind is the bitcoin protocol.

That's not 100% accurate.
bitcoind is, yet, essential to the network, since it's the only implementation capable of fully verifying the blockchain.
But even bitcoind is "smaller" than the protocol, as it does not give you the means to exploit everything the protocol can offer. The Bitcoin protocol is quite rich and broad.

EhVedadoOAnonimato

hero member

Activity: 630

Merit: 500

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on October 02, 2012, 06:36:29 PM

So... if the membership agrees with your "bugs" then they'll get fixed.

hehe, the only caveat is that, to be a member, you already have to:

Don't care about your privacy and anonymity that much, since you'll have to identify yourslf
Don't care about supporting an organization whose name is a lie in itself and will likely mislead people - with the high probability of this being intentional.

So, basically, those who are concerned about such "bugs" will probably never become a member. All they can do is to lament that so many people don't give a damn about it, including people important to Bitcoin like you.
Finally, this other reply of mine also applies here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1225189

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on October 02, 2012, 06:36:29 PM

Identities/voting: Please see "Sybil Attack" for why we're requiring names, mailing addresses and emails. If you've got a magical way of identifying anonymous people please send me the source code, I could use it for the Bitcoin Faucet.

Pardon my ignorance, but how can somebody "sybil attack" it? I don't get it. Are GLBSE assets vulnerable to "sybil attack" because people can be anonymous shareholders?

If your concern is "an evil person" buying up the majority of votes and deciding everything, then please keep in mind:

Bitcoin mining itself faces the same "risk", with a much greater impact in case it happens.
Influent people like you could always start a new organization if somebody you don't like grabs control of this one. People would likely follow you as they're doing right now.
At the very extreme, the bylaws could state that anonymous members as a whole don't get to have more than 49% of the votes, for example. I find this unnecessary, but it might tranquilize "unsecured" people.

[/list]

Atlas

jr. member

Activity: 56

Merit: 1

Quote from: vuce on October 03, 2012, 04:58:03 AM

Quote from: The_Duke on October 03, 2012, 01:29:45 AM

We really need a full alternative, TBF independent, client. Asap.

bitcoind is the bitcoin protocol. You can't have two different protocols that would be compatible. One thing you're forgetting are the miners. If there were to be a drastic change in the protocol, at least 50% of the miners would have to agree to it, thus I don't see a problem with having one "official" client representing the protocol. For everything else (gui, taint analysis, etc), we already have several clients that follow the same protocol, and you are free to use one any of them.

cbitcoin, libbitcoin, BitcoinJ will all be independent clients that implement the consensus that is the Bitcoin protocol.

vuce

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

Quote from: The_Duke on October 03, 2012, 01:29:45 AM

We really need a full alternative, TBF independent, client. Asap.

bitcoind is the bitcoin protocol. You can't have two different protocols that would be compatible. One thing you're forgetting are the miners. If there were to be a drastic change in the protocol, at least 50% of the miners would have to agree to it, thus I don't see a problem with having one "official" client representing the protocol. For everything else (gui, taint analysis, etc), we already have several clients that follow the same protocol, and you are free to use any one of them.

gyverlb

hero member

Activity: 896

Merit: 1000

Quote from: The_Duke on October 03, 2012, 01:29:45 AM

We really need a full alternative, TBF independent, client. Asap.

Wouldn't you have the very same hypothetical problems with the developers of the alternative client?

Why would it be needed to fork or create a client asap? If there's a need and a will there will be a fork at the right time. At least every open-source project of some significance behaved like this in the past. Even a behemoth like OpenOffice was forked a mere month after Oracle announced a new strategy for OpenSolaris worried developers. And yes, it's not a typo, they acted on an OpenSolaris strategy change not an OpenOffice one, open-source developers are "naturally" wary of heavy-handed organizations (being corporations or foundations doesn't really matter...).

If you feel powerless, learn to code and to use git and hack the bitcoin client. Then if something wrong happens to the official client you'd be in a position to make a difference by forking the project yourself or help those like you who will fork it. If coding is out of the question, start putting coins in a "savings" address in case you need to pay someone to code for you.
Words on a forum won't matter, people who can and are willing to code and people helping them will. And from my point of view many are or will be in the Bitcoin Foundation...

The_Duke

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

Lead Core BitKitty Developer

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on October 02, 2012, 06:36:29 PM

if the membership agrees with your "bugs" then they'll get fixed.

I'm happy that I'd already made a post in the Alternative client section, because if I hadn't I would have to do it now.

What you're saying here is that if something needs fixing (be it in bitcoind, TBF's setup, or other), it will only happen if enough paying members want it. So if something needs fixing that might not be beneficial to enough paying members (even if it is vital to the majority of the userbase that is not a member), it won't get done.

We really need a full alternative, TBF independent, client. Asap.

LightRider

legendary

Activity: 1500

Merit: 1022

I advocate the Zeitgeist Movement & Venus Project.

Heaven doesn't exist. Let's just try to make things less shitty for everyone.

Atlas

jr. member

Activity: 56

Merit: 1

The road to heaven is paved with patience and liberty.

Topic: [ANN] Bitcoin Foundation - page 9. (Read 127621 times)