Bitcoin constitution? | Bitcointalksearch.org

LostDutchman

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

Quote from: beatljuice on July 07, 2014, 02:33:21 PM

Quote from: LostDutchman on July 07, 2014, 11:32:37 AM

Just how much control over Bitcoin to you people want to give away?

Want to explain what you're asking?

I thought all my suggestions were helping keep Bitcoin free from control, and was hoping to hear other ideas, but I need a little more to chew on than a vague question.

My point is that even creating such a document or service establishes a precedent that you don't want in place.

beatljuice

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: LostDutchman on July 07, 2014, 11:32:37 AM

Just how much control over Bitcoin to you people want to give away?

Want to explain what you're asking?

I thought all my suggestions were helping keep Bitcoin free from control, and was hoping to hear other ideas, but I need a little more to chew on than a vague question.

LostDutchman

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 250

Just how much control over Bitcoin to you people want to give away?

beatljuice

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: kuzetsa on July 05, 2014, 04:19:51 PM

Some of those ideas aren't bad, but I don't understand why this is in the "legal" sub-forum.

I wasn't sure where to put it, and a constitution is considered a legal document.

Quote from: kuzetsa on July 05, 2014, 04:19:51 PM

The 51% thing isn't something I want to discuss, and definitely makes think of the awkward feeling I have about the way just a few large mining pools are currently centralizing a lot of control over how and what can be included in the blockchain.
.
A few of your points can be summed up in a single word: fungibility ~ ^{[link on wikipedia]}
.
Special restriction, privileges, or treatment of any transaction (or of any entity) can only diminish bitcoin's value:
Bitcoin has fungibility, and should continue to have as much fungibility as possible.

I question how good the minors being able to choose which blocks to mine and/or transactions to include is. On the surface, as a libertarian, I love the idea, but doesn't this affect fungibility to an extent? A few pennies don't mean much to us westerners, but can mean quite a bit to someone in Uganda.

You might argue for something like a "no transaction goes more than 50 blocks without being confirmed no matter how much the minor's fee was," rule - but that starts to sound like the whole net-neutrality debate where the people willing to pay get the fast bandwidth.

kuzetsa

sr. member

Activity: 369

Merit: 250

Some of those ideas aren't bad, but I don't understand why this is in the "legal" sub-forum.

The 51% thing isn't something I want to discuss, and definitely makes think of the awkward feeling I have about the way just a few large mining pools are currently centralizing a lot of control over how and what can be included in the blockchain.
.
A few of your points can be summed up in a single word: fungibility ~ ^{[link on wikipedia]}
.
Special restriction, privileges, or treatment of any transaction (or of any entity) can only diminish bitcoin's value:
Bitcoin has fungibility, and should continue to have as much fungibility as possible.

beatljuice

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

I was reading the EBA Opinion on ‘virtual currencies’ (http://www.eba.europa.eu/documents/10180/657547/EBA-Op-2014-08+Opinion+on+Virtual+Currencies.pdf) and it made me think of something that might be a good or bad idea. But I thought it might at least make for a cool discussion even if it's not workable. Please shoot these ideas down and/or improve on them.

What if we had guiding principles in place for the Bitcoin protocol? Preferably codded into the protocol - making it necessary to hard-fork for a change in this "constitution."

Here are some possible principles that might be included:

No one can be restricted from transmitting any amount they want
The code will always be open
No entity smaller than 51% of total users/minors/nodes can govern Bitcoin (Obviously this one will require huge debate about what it means.)
Contributions to the core network will be rewarded (Could we create a pool of transaction fees that rewards Coders? Minors? Noders?)
Some sort of sanctity/equality of transactions? We don't want to stifle free market, but we also don't want to have transactions not go through which also might affect the free market.
No special treatment for any entity (government, exchange, user, etc.)

You get the idea. Discus!

Topic: Bitcoin constitution? (Read 1557 times)