Topic: Bitcoinfoundation.org - Is it worth joining? (Read 3928 times)

https://bitcoinfoundation.org/

https://bitcoinfoundation.org/support

So I was looking over this site, they seem pretty big, I was wondering what are the main benefits of being part of this foundation?

Even as an individual, is it worth it? Seems pretty pricey as well.

If anyone is part of it, would be great if you can give some insight about it.

https://bitcoinfoundation.org/

https://bitcoinfoundation.org/support

So I was looking over this site, they seem pretty big, I was wondering what are the main benefits of being part of this foundation?

Even as an individual, is it worth it? Seems pretty pricey as well.

If anyone is part of it, would be great if you can give some insight about it.

Don't give me that crap. People are paid to work on linux, firefox, apache, and any number of large open soruce projects. In fact, some projects are responsible for the livelihood of developers, such as ruby on rails.

Why shouldn't it be the same with bitcoin, in which their whole points is to support commercial activity!?

You think those linux foundation members are doing nefarious things? I am sure that they are getting some "financial gains" from funding Linus' works.

If you want to fix under-representation in an organization, you fix it by joining it as a member so that you are represented.

These same open source projects are also completely decentralized, some having thousands of developers from all over the world and none are getting paid.

The whole bitcoinfoundation thing has made it less likely that the development will be sustainable, open and decentralized. If I were a developer working on open source projects and perhaps interested in joining another (which I happen to be, heh) I would think twice before joining one where the "lead dev" is getting paid by an organisation that is (partly) ran by some companies that have a financial gain from his work. It will limit freedom, and it is not very open-spirited.

"We set up something flawed, and if you don't like the flaws you can join it and make it better".

 

Security is an easier problem to tackle in an open source project, sufficiently managed. That's not to say decentralization don't have costs.

You can join the Bitcoin foundation as an individual member, have more corporations join it, etc.

No its not. There's plenty of open source project that have excellent security track records where no one gets paid.

Also, paying gavin does not make this project more secure, it makes it LESS secure, because it creates dependencies, centralization and it gives influence through a small amount of companies that have a financial interest for themselves rather than towards the community.

The problem with decentralization and extreme resiliency is that it is EXPENSIVE.

Also I will not contribute to a foundation that doesn't have the same views (PM me if you want the reasons why the foundation is not worthy of my contributions) as me is not hindering the software. What is a hinder is one person knowing too much about the entire codebase and no one else stepping up and creating another full node software to compete with this. There always needs checks and balances and this one things that is not decentralized and doesn't have the correct checks.

You're contradicting yourself. First you're against developers getting paid, then you whine how Gavin isn't expendable and there is no one to take his place. Well, why would there be if people can have well paying jobs instead of working on bitcoin code for free? At least someone needs to be paid to deal with the stuff other people don't want to. Gavin is the most appropriate candidate for the job. Because of people like you that don't want to contribute, there (probably) isn't enough money to hire more developers and make it more "decentralized".

either way I came to the final decision of joining the foundation as a lifetime member. Thank you.

Ohhh and you know how long thing would take if he wasn't getting paid... I am just saying there like 10 core developers between them and there time, they couldn't handle the software. I just think that one person handling the lead on such a revolutionary idea is bad news. Remember I want to run a full node, currently there is no other option. I think this is classic monopoly and if Gavin was unable to do his job tomorrow, bitcoin would greatly stuffer, we need more lead developers, maybe we can get 3 people on board I feel little bit better. In reality one person that relied on this heavy in this much a decentralized way, is insanity!

Also I never talked about bounties, actually I would disagree with a bounties model, that code is usually rushed and very buggy. I think people that take on the job of bitcoin-qt want to give something back. Hey I knew C++ and python at the level I know other languages I would be right there helping sadly I can't.

Mozilla, makes a browser... i don't see any parallel and I think your miss understood why I disagree with Gavin getting paid. I feel like it is giving too much power to on person, which it is cause no ONE has said an actual person's name IF Gavin was unable to do bitcoins anymore.

RE: what's my role in the core team:  I try to do whatever needs to get done, that isn't getting done.  Today I'm cross-compiling the 0.8 release and testing it on Windows, trying to track down a crash-at-exit issue and an excessive-memory-use issue that seems to only happen on Windows.

When I'm not doing nitty-gritty things like that, I try to work on big, what-is-most-likely-to-make-Bitcoin-succeed problems.

RE: why pay me a salary?  "why pay for the cow if you can get the milk for free?"

I told myself (and my wife) a couple of years ago that I wasn't going to sink dollars into Bitcoin-- that I'd sink time into it, and that I'd EARN bitcoins by starting a bitcoin-related startup.

Well, there's enough core development work to keep me busy full time. I wasn't very happy doing core development work AND trying to make ClearCoin happen; I'm happier when I can concentrate on one thing.  Besides, having my own startup introduces potential conflicts of interest (ClearCoin sparked conspiracy theories about why I push for multisig transactions so hard).

RE: what if I get hit by a bus?

Then the other core developers will carry on without me. I'm not indispensable.

RE: Why should you join the Foundation?  What is in it for you, personally?

That is a hard question, because you can "free ride" -- if we're successful making Bitcoin successful, everybody will benefit. Personally, I don't respect people with that kind of "I'm not going to do it because I'm sure somebody else will" attitude, and I think in the long run the people who take the risks and roll up their sleeves and do the work needed tend to win in the end.

Really, the main benefit of joining the Foundation is it is an organization full of people who are rolling up their sleeves and doing the work. If you're smart, you'll realize that networking with those types of people is to your long-term benefit.

I've joined, and i think it's worthy.

You're making a mountain out of a molehill (not the first time either). There are at least three I can think of off the top of my head who could lead the devs quite happily ... and if it really comes down to it I imagine Satoshi would reappear, the same, though changed.

I wouldn't lose any sleep over this for a number of reasons.

• I've seen key superstar developers that looked irreplaceable leave many important commercial software products.  They were always replaced successfully, even if it took their successors a little while to get up to speed at the same level of proficiency.  For interesting projects, there will always be smart people eager to step up to the plate.  And Bitcoin is definitely interesting.
• Lots of very smart and capable developers are working on the Bitcoin client and related projects right this instant, and several of them could have the right skillset to replace Gavin.  Some might visit bitcointalk frequently, but others work with low publicity or visibility.  Subscribe to the development mailing list on sourceforege to get a fuller picture of development activity.
• Retroactively imagine the panic you would've felt if you'd known Satoshi was leaving for good.  If anyone was irreplaceable, it was him.  And yet, things have turned out fine.

Having said all this, I don't want to be misunderstood, Gavin is a very valuable asset, I like his style, and I hope he sticks around for a long time.

But who on the core team has the knowledge of the codebase like Gavin? That is what we trying to figure out... Think about if Gavin can't do bitcoins who will take over? He isn't expendable! There is no straight answer to this...

But who on the core team has the knowledge of the codebase like Gavin? That is what we trying to figure out... Think about if Gavin can't do bitcoins who will take over? He isn't expendable! There is no straight answer to this...

In case of the bus scenario: Let the core team decide among them and elect one to take his job! Otherwise we'll have some weird dynasty up there.