Topic: Introducing new "the only official foundation of Bitcoin" [sign up as president] - page 2. (Read 4773 times)

Any new developement? How is the social media campaign going?

needs media attention

@Litecoin guy

Welcome to the bitcoin foundation  


@altcoin hitler (lol)
Welcome her rebellious majesty.  



Maybe we should start calling the false 'Bitcoin foundation' something like 'Bitcoin misrepresentation' or something to avoid confusion as the OOFB is the first and only real Bitcoin foundation.

Well, this certainly looks like a humiliating defeat for the bitcoin foundation in case this has some legs.

Give this guy a medal!


What i gather:


Ok, guys. I take over now! I'm the new king of Bitcoin.  

"The Bitcoin Foundation" is a joke. OOFB ftw!

Organize, GO!




Don't give away your voice to representatives you didn't even elect! "the bitcoin foundation" has no say whatsoever because we are the bitcoin foundation! Fuck elitism and bribery! Decentralisation for the win! (who do those clowns think they are?)

"The Bitcoin foundation" has been declared insignificant, unrepresentative and possibly illegal by the real Bitcoin foundation. How's that? Big fuckin' WIN.

hört sich gut an, ich bin dabei  


hast du denn mittlerweile was gelernt beim thema bitcoin?

Welcome Mr. President! 

Yes, signing up as president for the real Bitcoin foundation! Count me in!

Good question, we probably don't need any foundation at all but since the other illegal group by the name 'the Bitcoin foundation' doesn't give a shit, it probably doesn't make a difference if there's more than one. In case you don't agree, you can still open up the anti-foundation that's denying all other foundations but i wouldn't see the real difference to this one. Well, you're probably there already   Just assign yourself a rank. In case this goes out of hand (and it most likely will at some point) you can still open a new foundation like the no-foundation or no foundation at all. (but you are already in no foundation so i don't see why you are complaining)

BTW i have no idea what you are refering to when talking about 'the old foundation' as this one (OOFB) is the first and only true foundation.


welcome secretary  


Welcome chairman!



If that's another thing than this one you need a new thread. But i'm not sure if it's a different thing or not. How about you just assign yourself a rank and see if it works out for you If it doesn't you can still open a different one. Nobody said you couldn't be member on more than one foundation. Although the OOFB is the only real thing.



@CryptoFaxMachine

Fascinating stuff, but i do have to admit i am too drunk to wrap my head around it. But maybe other people can make more sense of it. You could still found a working-group/subgroup within the 'OOFB' with people interested in developing on your concept or just go ahead and found a seperate group. Whichever you prefer. It's all about being a player, taking the ball and running with it as we have just been learning  



Now you got me confused. The OOFB is the only 'real' foundation and we aren't associated with that website you're linking.
Also i have no idea what you mean with 'other foundation' as this one (OOFB) is the only foundation. We just got started so it's a bit early to judge if work will be getting done or not.


-----------

I already have to announce to all my dear fellow ministers, presidents, secretaries, kings, chancellors, chairmen, embassadors and whatnot i'll be temporarily or permanantly retreating from my throne as majesty in the near to midterm future and temporary or permanently vanish into the night (as soon we have had enough other kings, secretraies, presidents [...] assigned and welcomed to the OOFB and the concept has been understood to a sufficient extend).

I think I like the original post more than the other "real" Bitcoin foundation.
http://thebitcoin.foundation/

On the plus side, the other Bitcoin foundation appears to be getting some actual work done.

In the last few days I have spent a little time thinking about this problem in a little depth. I believe the real problem with the bitcoin foundation is that it is a centralized organization living in a decentralized world. What I would propose is a parallel block-chain in which members opt-in to solve arbitrary proof of work problems in order to compete to add data into the foundation. For example, if the foundation wanted to produce a press release, they would compete to add a sentence at a time to the document which is preserved within the blockchain. Forks would be handled through a system of simple rules such as longest chain with the lowest average block size to promote conciseness.

So how would you deal with consensus on the current project? The answer is quite simply, spontaneous order. Each block will contain a header and within the header there exists a project code which will allow people to add to whatever project they want upon solving the next proof of work. After some arbitrary length of time blocks that contain project codes, that have not been used recently, would be invalid. We could use a block explorer to aggregate and view the individual projects.

Wouldn’t that mean that it is possible to attack the network and produce contradictory reports or garble added to in-progress reports? No, that is impossible. By definition, the members of the foundation are the people actively hashing to compete to add to the foundation. The foundation is the opinions, ideas, and data contained within the blockchain. By definition, the attackers are members of the foundation expressing their their opinions weighted by their respective hashing power.

How could you possibly produce coherent policy direction in such a system? Statistics. Take for example policy A. You can say that of 100 projects developed on this policy, 71% were in favour. and 29% were against.

Doesn't that leave the system open to the abuse inherent in statistical manipulation? No. This kind of meta level aggregation of the blockchain would be subject to a peer-review process of some kind.

How does this compare with the existing Bitcoin foundation? Well, I should state before we begin that I literally know almost nothing about the Bitcoin foundation. However, I would imagine that to produce a policy in an outdated and hierarchical organization like the Bitcoin foundation it starts with a committee. That committee produces a report suggesting an point of view or course of action and that document is sent to the executive board. The executive board takes that report and immediately calls Mark Kerpeles, who is too busy feeding his cat to answer his phone. In a panic the board makes and publishes an arbitrary opinion that then carries the weight of every member of the foundation. By contrast in the decentralized system, the policy report is nothing more than a statistical analysis of the aggregate of the the expressions contained within the blockchain.

So is there like a president or someone in charge of the foundation? Fuck no. Unless you are actively hashing in an attempt introduce data into the blockchain then you aren't even a member.

Wow, that is a fantastic idea? What would you call it? I would call it the Bizarro Bitcoin foundation and people participating in it would identify themselves with goatees.

I would like my card to read:

Chairmen Of The Board
Founding Member Of GoofBal

I declare myself
secretariat of slack
all hail dobbs

Here's my foundation: Global's Only Official Foundation of Bitcoin for All. (Still working on the acronym, but I'm sure it'll come to me )

why do someone need a new Foundation and why would BTC needs the old Foundation ?

Would be great if people took it that far. Btw what 'foundation' are you talking about? We don't hate! And we are the only official and legitimate foundation of Bitcoin. Forget all the wannabees. This is the real thing. The group you are talking about is seperate and not connected to the userbase.



welcome aboard captain!



Yes, more awareness is what's needed. 1st Minister for dope, welcome!

Ok, i'm president too. 

Really don't get the foundation hate. They are providing development funding. They hopefully are now toning down the political nonsense a little. But whether you like them or not, it's their business what they do with their money.

If Bitcoin can't cope with this, then it's doomed anyway. Imagine when the banks start funding development work...

Yeah, I hope Mike Hearn's Lighthouse thing takes off. It would be cool for dev work to be totally decentralised. But there's a lot that needs doing.

Hopefully Lighthouse may do this. But if not, what's to stop you finding some developer, making an offer, petitioning users in a thread here, voting on some features, set up an escrow of some sort...

This is very cool because now "the Bitcoin Foundation" lost all the legitimacy they never had. Every time someone talks about "the bitcoin foundation" you can ask "which one?"

I'm in! I want to be chancelor and minister for dope related stuff! (hope that isn't taken yet)

We need to get more public awareness!

Correct. You assign yourself (like everyone else around here). I have no say in anything and am not responsible in any way, shape or form because i'm drunk as fuck most of the day. Welcome to the board of directors!

I'd like to join, so i gotta assign my rank myself?