Topic: Is it good or bad that Core development is virtually controlled by one company? - page 11. (Read 8220 times)

Coders code eat like shining kings of the Earth while their peasant servants salt your fields. U jelly?

Nah, seems perfectly reasonable that the "reference" software of the decentralized future of money would share the roadmap of a company with direct and growing ties to the past of money. 

Besides, we all know that a beautiful 76 million dollar saddle won't chafe too much. It doesn't have to, consider it a down payment on lots of riding through the verdant countryside together [altruistic work on open source software for the benefit of everyone].

A wonderful day in Bitcoin history, my friends.

All forks are dangerous and all forks must be deployed with near total consensus. Both hard and soft forks.*

_{*Use in moderation.}

I'm not giving you an analogy...

But your analogy is false. Anything that blockstream would try to do with Bitcoin Core would have to go through sipa because he is the only one with commit access that works for blockstream. He can't "give them the keys" because there are no keys and there is nothing to give. Sipa could write code and commit it or people at blockstream could write code and submit a PR. Either way, the other 6 people with commit access would notice or the other hundreds of people actively watching Bitcoin Core's progress (me included) would notice. They would definitely notice if code was committed without a PR because that goes against the code review process. They would definitely notice if a PR was merged without discussion or with discussion and a lot of NACKs. That would of course result in the offending code being reverted and sipa having his commit access revoked. If that doesn't happen, a lot of people will be forking Bitcoin away from Bitcoin Core.

So going along with your analogy, sure the person in the family can give his friends the keys, but he cannot disable the alarm system. The alarm system will go off when the burglars try to break in and then the burglars are caught by the police and sent to jail.

your analogy is much like saying.. "its not like burglars wanting to break in and steal the family jewels, blockstream was a family business, it is their house"

but its more like "someone in the family is now stealing the family jewels. he has now told his friends if they hand him some cash, he will leave the door unlocked so anyone can sneak in"
while also pointing the finger at the 2 cousins he pushed away and said dont trust them they know bad people, they are the ones after the family jewels, not my friends

The idea that blockstream controls core and has a secret agenda to manipulate core is complete and absolute bullshit.

How, exactly, does blockstream "drive" the development of Bitcoin Core? Only 1 out of the 7 people who have commit access work for blockstream. gmaxwell used to but he voluntarily gave up his commit access for personal reasons. 1 out of 7 certainly does not mean that they have control, in fact, that is very little control. The other 6 developers are not affiliated with blockstream and they would revoke the access rights of sipa if he decided to commit things for blockstream that is detrimental to Bitcoin.

Furthermore, blockstream was founded by several developers who worked on Bitcoin Core before blockstream existed and those people have contributed greatly to Bitcoin Core. This isn't some company that was founded by a bunch of people who then hired Core devs to do their work, this is Core devs who wanted to do something and founded a company for it.

Garzik is reportedly now using the same shovel as Gavin and Mike, as he attacks segwit for no good reason.

I wonder what make him lose enough self-respect to put up with being bossed around by a bigoted, copyright-trolling shitlord like Olivier Janssens?

You'd think Classic's (heavy-handed, top-down) steadfast commitment to 75% instead of the far more reasonable (and miner endorsed) 95% would clue Jeff in to the fact it's not a serious effort.  But no....

Oh well.  We needed a new Lolcow to replace Hearn anyway!   

r/btc is very much anti core, so much so that it's just as much of a fucking joke as r/bitcoin. I don't really think you'll find anywhere that's untarnished. You may as well pick and choose and come to your own conclusions.  

If the majority of the community agrees that certain commits should not be followed, they won't. Kinda how Gavin and Mike dug their own holes.

So what should I read? /r/Bitcoin only which is biased for Core? 

How much power do they have? If they choose to raise the block size to 4MB, could they make it just by snapping their fingers?

Also, being a member of Core development is certainly nice and honorific, but it doesn't bring much food on the table. Developers need to have a regular job.

i dont support gavin.

but what if blockstreams agenda, all along was to make gavin and hearne the scapegoats to take peoples attention away from the blockstream corporatization.

we all know that gavin and hearn wouldnt succeed. even if us normal folk just wanted more capacity without the corporate bait and switches.. we knew gavin and hearne was not the solution.
but now we know blockstream isnt either.

so now you know it too.. what are you going to do to:

how will you strip their privileges?

This isn't new. You see, in a free economy people can get hired by companies of even found them. Does that mean that they'll abuse their power over developing a project with perfectly open development procedures like bitcoin? Maybe. But if they're caught on the act it's very likely that their privileges will be stripped.

To me it seems like this argument is pushed by Gavin's supporters to make it seem like there's a conspiracy edging them out. But even if the theory is true, what evidence do you have to show that blockstream is not good for bitcoin, can you compare it to bitcoin XT or Classic o say that it is better or worst? No. It's not even out yet and as long as there is no urgent need for larger blocks (which there isn't) some people better stop pushing that narrative.

blockstream shills reveal the bait and switch to move common bitcoin users off of bitcoin and into their pretend money.


its becoming obvious that they dont want bitcoin to be a useful currency for everyone/anyone.
sounds so much departed away from satoshi's reason for creating bitcoin and is moving closer to the corporate crap that the genesis quote was trying to highlight as being wrong with this planet

So what if its going in the right direction and any changes have consensus what the problem?

"We were one of the first companies that painted a vision for interoperable blockchains, that there wasn’t going to be one blockchain, but many of them, all building off the bitcoin codebase to deliver the technology."

No false modesty here. Just a dynamic, innovative company.




Problem?

"Blockstream has raised $55m in Series A funding to continue its work expanding the bitcoin code base for commercial use." --CoinDesk

"A Series A round is the name typically given to a company's first significant round of venture capital financing. The name refers to the class of preferred stock sold to investors in exchange for their investment. It is usually the first series of stock after the common stock and common stock options issued to company founders, employees, friends and family and angel investors."--Wikip

To be fair, I don't think a private company has the same legal obligations. There are no shareholders.

dont diss bitcoin core. or they will call you a corporate shill.. oh wait................................

ok, lets try something else.. 2nd time lucky

dont be part of the community asking for a simple 3 line of coe updateto expand bitcoin, because.. blockstream is there for the benefit of the community.. oh wait.................

ok i got it, third time lucky

dont rebuttal the code using logic, because blockstream is all about the code logic.. oh wait.. dang it, even in this case blockstreams defense is illogic rebuttals that make no sense. and are just said to confuse noobs into surrendering to the roadmap..
EG
blockstream: increasing to 2mb hardfork will require data centers  .. community: but, segwit full archival is between 2-4mb blocks
blockstream: users cant handle the data.. community: skype videocalls are 30mb UPLOAD every 10minutes from a home PC
blockstream: but the other implementations have corporate agenda.. community: so do you, you even wrote your agenda to move people off bitcoin in a roadmap (liquid, sidechains LN)


in short it was always a 3 corporate shell game.

3 shells and the name of the game is "you have 2 chances to throw away the corporate ball under the shells, the 3rd shell stays"
(secret all 3 shells R3, toomin, and blockstream have corporate balls) though for months they have pretended they are here only for the community