Topic: Gregory Maxwell threatens to sell his bitcoins and find other things to work on - page 3. (Read 7967 times)
June 01, 2015, 07:33:33 PM
Core Devs are killing Bitcoin. Please somebody stop this.
June 01, 2015, 07:31:31 PM
I am personally concerned that this would matter to anyone. Before I continue, I want to point out that gmaxwell is a great asset to Bitcoin and the community. However I don't think it should matter that one person might stop working on Bitcoin as the open source and decentralized nature of Bitcoin means that it should not rely on any one person or any one small subset of people. If the community is concerned that any one person is going to stop work on Bitcoin then we have a bigger centralization problem then anyone realizes.
It is not uncommon for people to leave a large company in the middle of a project and the project most go on. It would be unusual for no team members on a project to not get some kind of a job offer while working on a long term project.
With all that being said, I do think his concerns should be somehow addressed. I don't know if this means making major changes to the proposed fork, making minor changes or making an argument to him that this will not cause further centralization.
It is not uncommon for people to leave a large company in the middle of a project and the project most go on. It would be unusual for no team members on a project to not get some kind of a job offer while working on a long term project.
With all that being said, I do think his concerns should be somehow addressed. I don't know if this means making major changes to the proposed fork, making minor changes or making an argument to him that this will not cause further centralization.
watch out, if you say the project you might confuse someone.
does a project have to have a specific endpoint to be defined as a project?
A few examples of a project would be the building of a house, the design of a specific model year car or the rebranding of a company.
A few examples of a system would be selling widgets, producing cars or internal quality controls.
You could say that the design of the forked Bitcoin protocol would be a project (it would be finished once the changed protocol is accepted by the network) while Bitcoin itself would be closer to a system (ideally "Bitcoin" would never end).
People are concerned about his potential departure because of his large amounts of contributions he has made to Bitcoin over the years.
June 01, 2015, 07:16:38 PM
I am personally concerned that this would matter to anyone. Before I continue, I want to point out that gmaxwell is a great asset to Bitcoin and the community. However I don't think it should matter that one person might stop working on Bitcoin as the open source and decentralized nature of Bitcoin means that it should not rely on any one person or any one small subset of people. If the community is concerned that any one person is going to stop work on Bitcoin then we have a bigger centralization problem then anyone realizes.
It is not uncommon for people to leave a large company in the middle of a project and the project most go on. It would be unusual for no team members on a project to not get some kind of a job offer while working on a long term project.
With all that being said, I do think his concerns should be somehow addressed. I don't know if this means making major changes to the proposed fork, making minor changes or making an argument to him that this will not cause further centralization.
It is not uncommon for people to leave a large company in the middle of a project and the project most go on. It would be unusual for no team members on a project to not get some kind of a job offer while working on a long term project.
With all that being said, I do think his concerns should be somehow addressed. I don't know if this means making major changes to the proposed fork, making minor changes or making an argument to him that this will not cause further centralization.
watch out, if you say the project you might confuse someone.
does a project have to have a specific endpoint to be defined as a project?
google says "an individual or collaborative enterprise that is carefully planned and designed to achieve a particular aim."
I'd say bitcoin is exactly that. Its ever evolving but fits that definition.
Also, how can one make the argument that it will be terrible if he leaves then make the argument that "its not his project", if its not one of his projects (a project is a collaborative effort) why should one care if he leaves? ELI5 because I obviously need it.
June 01, 2015, 07:12:22 PM
I am personally concerned that this would matter to anyone. Before I continue, I want to point out that gmaxwell is a great asset to Bitcoin and the community. However I don't think it should matter that one person might stop working on Bitcoin as the open source and decentralized nature of Bitcoin means that it should not rely on any one person or any one small subset of people. If the community is concerned that any one person is going to stop work on Bitcoin then we have a bigger centralization problem then anyone realizes.
It is not uncommon for people to leave a large company in the middle of a project and the project most go on. It would be unusual for no team members on a project to not get some kind of a job offer while working on a long term project.
With all that being said, I do think his concerns should be somehow addressed. I don't know if this means making major changes to the proposed fork, making minor changes or making an argument to him that this will not cause further centralization.
It is not uncommon for people to leave a large company in the middle of a project and the project most go on. It would be unusual for no team members on a project to not get some kind of a job offer while working on a long term project.
With all that being said, I do think his concerns should be somehow addressed. I don't know if this means making major changes to the proposed fork, making minor changes or making an argument to him that this will not cause further centralization.
watch out, if you say the project you might confuse someone.
June 01, 2015, 07:09:03 PM
I am personally concerned that this would matter to anyone. Before I continue, I want to point out that gmaxwell is a great asset to Bitcoin and the community. However I don't think it should matter that one person might stop working on Bitcoin as the open source and decentralized nature of Bitcoin means that it should not rely on any one person or any one small subset of people. If the community is concerned that any one person is going to stop work on Bitcoin then we have a bigger centralization problem then anyone realizes.
It is not uncommon for people to leave a large company in the middle of a project and the project most go on. It would be unusual for no team members on a project to not get some kind of a job offer while working on a long term project.
With all that being said, I do think his concerns should be somehow addressed. I don't know if this means making major changes to the proposed fork, making minor changes or making an argument to him that this will not cause further centralization.
It is not uncommon for people to leave a large company in the middle of a project and the project most go on. It would be unusual for no team members on a project to not get some kind of a job offer while working on a long term project.
With all that being said, I do think his concerns should be somehow addressed. I don't know if this means making major changes to the proposed fork, making minor changes or making an argument to him that this will not cause further centralization.
watch out, if you say the project you might confuse someone.
June 01, 2015, 05:59:41 PM
I am personally concerned that this would matter to anyone. Before I continue, I want to point out that gmaxwell is a great asset to Bitcoin and the community. However I don't think it should matter that one person might stop working on Bitcoin as the open source and decentralized nature of Bitcoin means that it should not rely on any one person or any one small subset of people. If the community is concerned that any one person is going to stop work on Bitcoin then we have a bigger centralization problem then anyone realizes.
It is not uncommon for people to leave a large company in the middle of a project and the project most go on. It would be unusual for no team members on a project to not get some kind of a job offer while working on a long term project.
With all that being said, I do think his concerns should be somehow addressed. I don't know if this means making major changes to the proposed fork, making minor changes or making an argument to him that this will not cause further centralization.
It is not uncommon for people to leave a large company in the middle of a project and the project most go on. It would be unusual for no team members on a project to not get some kind of a job offer while working on a long term project.
With all that being said, I do think his concerns should be somehow addressed. I don't know if this means making major changes to the proposed fork, making minor changes or making an argument to him that this will not cause further centralization.
June 01, 2015, 05:22:26 PM
if he doesnt believe in the project anymore why would you want him?
I don't know what you refer to as the project. Bitcoin wasn't Gavin's project last time I checked.
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
June 01, 2015, 04:02:06 PM
I say.. bring it, he should dump all the BTC he has. Why not?
Because Greg has probably done 10x more for Bitcoin than everyone in this thread combined.
So why shouldnt he dump his coin to get a return on his investment? I dont really understand your argument.
He can if he wants, obviously. But if he dumps all his coins, that's basically like
him giving up on Bitcoin, so the community would lose a very talented and dedicated
developer.
June 01, 2015, 03:46:38 PM
I say.. bring it, he should dump all the BTC he has. Why not?
Lose a bitcoin core developer, why not? /s
if he doesnt believe in the project anymore why would you want him?
June 01, 2015, 03:37:53 PM
I say.. bring it, he should dump all the BTC he has. Why not?
Lose a bitcoin core developer, why not? /s
June 01, 2015, 03:36:05 PM
I'm unclear on how going the XT path would make it centralized.
Because it will be needed more bandwidth, and a lot of people don't have access to it (node,etc...).
In other words, bitcoin is centralizing because it is successful, driving more transactions. Blaming Gavin for that is ridiculous. The irony is that the anti-Gavin freakout club looks like a old school clique that wants to keep volumes low so a small number of early adopters can play with their coins without the smelly public barging in. If you want centralization, keep bitcoin small with a limited base of support.
Gavin's fork proposal in itself centralizes nothing. It remains the rule that the miners collectively decide what Bitcoin will be. And if it turns out to be a mistake we can go back or go to Plan C, whatever. But I'll be investing more in altcoins if the Status Quo folks start winning and we see fees start rising while confirmation times lag because they didn't want to fix anything.
June 01, 2015, 02:43:30 PM
I say.. bring it, he should dump all the BTC he has. Why not?
Because Greg has probably done 10x more for Bitcoin than everyone in this thread combined.
So why shouldnt he dump his coin to get a return on his investment? I dont really understand your argument.
Because bitcoin is not about investments.
It's about rainbows and unicorns.
June 01, 2015, 02:33:40 PM
I say.. bring it, he should dump all the BTC he has. Why not?
Because Greg has probably done 10x more for Bitcoin than everyone in this thread combined.
So why shouldnt he dump his coin to get a return on his investment? I dont really understand your argument.
June 01, 2015, 02:25:56 PM
IMHO that's a mis-leading title. I can't gather anything from the reference that says he is currently threatening to sell his BTC and move on, just that if Bitcoin was to go down a bad route that he disliked he would then decide to sell his BTC and move on. He doesn't seem to currently be threatening to.
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
June 01, 2015, 02:14:11 PM
I say.. bring it, he should dump all the BTC he has. Why not?
Because Greg has probably done 10x more for Bitcoin than everyone in this thread combined.
June 01, 2015, 01:54:28 PM
I say.. bring it, he should dump all the BTC he has. Why not?
June 01, 2015, 01:11:01 PM
I also sold a large chunk of my btc holdings because i won't be bullied around by this asshat 'Gavin'.
I won't be using his fork ever. It's going to die one death or another anyways. I don't see it survive longterm.
I think this whole drama is one epic mistake caused by Gavin alone.
I won't be using his fork ever. It's going to die one death or another anyways. I don't see it survive longterm.
I think this whole drama is one epic mistake caused by Gavin alone.
Thank you for leaving Bitcoin Mircea Popescu!
June 01, 2015, 09:50:15 AM
Throwing is toys out of the pram to get his own way? thats how this comes across to me
full member
Activity: 882
Merit: 102
PayAccept - Worldwide payments accepted in seconds
June 01, 2015, 09:47:02 AM
I read the other devs are 'childish' and so on... the only one childish is Gavin with his 'my way or the highway'. Bitcoin looses a lot support because of this and XT will have even less support by the people.
Maxwell deserves some respect for his statement. Many in the community feel similar. I also sold a large chunk of my btc holdings because i won't be bullied around by this asshat 'Gavin'.
I won't be using his fork ever. It's going to die one death or another anyways. I don't see it survive longterm.
I think this whole drama is one epic mistake caused by Gavin alone.
Maxwell deserves some respect for his statement. Many in the community feel similar. I also sold a large chunk of my btc holdings because i won't be bullied around by this asshat 'Gavin'.
I won't be using his fork ever. It's going to die one death or another anyways. I don't see it survive longterm.
I think this whole drama is one epic mistake caused by Gavin alone.
June 01, 2015, 06:11:04 AM
Increasing the block size is the most simple change, lightning network and side chain just sounds too complicated to be easily maintained, raised level of complexity is the worst enemy for long term sustainability
In my opinion this is the only real argument for bigger blocksize.
But the market will decide if it's really true.
Just wait, it'll solve out of itself.
Jump to: