if a PR company can become self sustainable. then great.
EG make money doing conferences to help teach people about bitcoin, thus not leaching from internal members who gain nothing back
after all if the clintons and david cameron can make millions a year doing speeches for companies then PR can be self sustainable business without having to grab funds from those already in the bitcoin ecosystem.
the bitcoin foundation should be a information source for anyone to access. to learn what it is and to be explained at different levels. from laymen to technician.
EG one paragraph talking about UTXO with technical buzzwords. and another talking about the same subject but using the term "unspents" and no technical buzzwords.
also giving real information/ ration positive and negative expectations rather than utopian/cultist expectations
EG LN being a useful feature, but be wary of the flaws, such as signing the same address hundreds of times (the address re-use dilemma)
ofcourse it does not have to be "the bitcoin foundation" in one location/group/company it can be a consortium of diverse locations and operations. but most definitely should not be wasting its funds on board members/chairmen to sit in seats with gold laminated name badges to just feel important to the community while actually doing nothing for the community (like the previous incarnation)
Topic: Politically promising ***** appointed to the board of the Bitcoin Foundation (Read 389 times)
October 31, 2016, 03:12:57 AM
October 31, 2016, 12:44:50 AM
In fairness to the Bitcoin Foundation, maybe they have also done some good for the Bitcoin world. I am still new to this forum so I would like to know the good they have done for Bitcoin in terms of adoption. But the skeptic in me is thinking that the foundation might be used to leverage the acceptance of Bitcoin Unlimited. Can that be possible?
Well, they held some interesting debates with some of the major role-players in the beginning and then some of them started to line their pockets with the donations that came in from the companies. These companies stopped donating and the funds dried up, and then things went south.
At the time, most people were against organizations like this, but developers like Gavin thought it was a great idea. If I am correct, developers got paid by this foundation too, and when the funds was gone, they went to work for MIT.
October 30, 2016, 09:10:50 PM
Quote
Electronic payment processing times and fees are too high, an important
reason why 85% of all commerce globally is still done in cash
reason why 85% of all commerce globally is still done in cash
What is this, but I can't agree with this one, this more like jokes in my mind, anyone can do with this one?
October 30, 2016, 08:52:10 PM
In fairness to the Bitcoin Foundation, maybe they have also done some good for the Bitcoin world. I am still new to this forum so I would like to know the good they have done for Bitcoin in terms of adoption. But the skeptic in me is thinking that the foundation might be used to leverage the acceptance of Bitcoin Unlimited. Can that be possible?
October 30, 2016, 01:34:34 PM
The Bitcoin Foundation should just change their goals and business model. They should focus primarily on PR to promote Bitcoin and to
increase adoption. We do not need a central authority, but if we have to pay someone to do something, it might as well be for something we
need or want. Nobody wants them, in the current role they are now.
increase adoption. We do not need a central authority, but if we have to pay someone to do something, it might as well be for something we
need or want. Nobody wants them, in the current role they are now.
October 30, 2016, 08:43:52 AM
got to love it
reason they think people will use bitcoin right next to the reason they wont use bitcoin
$0.06 fee is not "cheap" for those countries.
the main gripe people had of the old bitcoin foundation was:
the members fees
how the members fees were used
where the excess pot of funds disappeared.
i think any new foundation should not request member fee's but instead make money from doing conventions
thus their income is dependant on 'spreading the word'
reason they think people will use bitcoin right next to the reason they wont use bitcoin
Quote
• Traditional financial services, especially banking, are not inclusive for the 2.1
billion people that live in poverty (less than $3.10/day)²;
• Electronic payment processing times and fees are too high, an important
reason why 85% of all commerce globally is still done in cash³
billion people that live in poverty (less than $3.10/day)²;
• Electronic payment processing times and fees are too high, an important
reason why 85% of all commerce globally is still done in cash³
$0.06 fee is not "cheap" for those countries.
the main gripe people had of the old bitcoin foundation was:
the members fees
how the members fees were used
where the excess pot of funds disappeared.
i think any new foundation should not request member fee's but instead make money from doing conventions
thus their income is dependant on 'spreading the word'
October 30, 2016, 06:47:51 AM
I thought TBF was dead. Why is this still a thing? I have not seen anything 'useful' from it in a long time.
October 30, 2016, 06:20:58 AM
https://gallery.mailchimp.com/2918be7dc96bb805b1532a71b/files/manifesto_02.pdf?ct=t(Annual_Members_Manifesto_10_25_2016)
I WILL POST ANY FURTHER ANSWERS HERE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Llew,
- You write that one group of people who have not adopted bitcoin during its first six years, because they are so poor that they have no currency at all , will be the first to adopt bitcoin. How old are you?
- You think that offering a bank-independent payment system is “covered in our values” and then you present your appalling argument for not covering it. We are still talking about the 8 preambles.
- The banking/politics maffia´s war against cash is _not_ covered in the preambles or mentioned at all anywhere in the document.
What you do cover is the “losses associated with card fraud” and “lacking security in traditional payment system”. Exactly who´s business is that? Who do you think you´re working for?
Now on to bullet points, where you count seven “rights” for that should not be impeded by “humans”: All of these “rights” (you probably mean “legal options to”) are already present in almost all countries in the world. And in remaining countries, (Russia, is there any more?), bitcoin is thriving outside of the legal system, providing much needed competition to the establishment. Your reasoning behind these bullet points is understandable: With this manifesto, all you need to do to succeed is to put your feet on your desk.
Llew, you are better advised to seek a career in politics or organized crime. There is a vacancy in Hillary Clintons campaign office. If you are eyeing a position at a bank, go apply for it. We are not here to help you with your career. You will be of no use to the bitcoin community.
Carl Lundström
+41 763 262630
From: Llew Claasen [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: den 29 oktober 2016 13:25
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Important update for foundation members
Hi Carl
Thanks for your notes.
One of the reasons that we've drafted the manifesto is to ensure that we're clear on what we're trying to do and to be clear on what our members can expect from us. Our manifesto will not ring true for everyone and that is a function of having different philosophies of what Bitcoin should be.
My further comments as follows:
1. Poorest people in the world (ie. in developing markets) are most likely to adopt bitcoin as a currency first, because existing solutions don't serve them. They will be important early adopters on the consumer side.
2. I think this is covered in our values. This is a fight that we can't win in the short term and picking a fighting at that scale right now will just put a big target on bitcoin for regulators. It's precisely this centralized control, surveillance and bullying that will drive adoption of bitcoin.
3. Also covered in the values.
Thanks again & best wishes. Feel free to reach out at any time.
llew
Llew Claasen
Executive Director
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Carl Lundstrom <[email protected]> wrote:
Write above this block to post a reply. [View conversation in MailChimp]
Carl Lundstrom ([email protected]) wrote:
Thanks for reaching out! If the preambles should be there at all, they serve to indicate the purpose or the reason of the whole engagement. I don´t agree with the focus you are demonstrating.
1. The poorest people in the world are mentioned repeatedly, as a main element of our engagement in bitcoin. But please - those people who live on $3,10 per day are those that have, and will have, the least of all people to do with bitcoin. Since you mention no other group of people, your piece implies the opposite. It is commendable to want to work for an increase in bitcoin usage among starving Africans and for an increase in their incomes, but other fora are better suited for that.
2. Secondly you overlook a very large problem that bitcoin is on the way of solving - the fact that the banking system is becoming a worldwide monopoly power, from which not even banks themselves are safe. In 2012, the oldest Swiss bank, Wegelin /en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wegelin_%26_Co.> , refused to expose its US resident customers to American authorities. Shortly thereafter, commercial US banks decided to exclude Bank Wegelin from the interbank US dollar market in New York, and threatened with other boycott measures – which made the further business of the bank commercially impossible. The bank still refused to expose its customers and preferred to close shop after nearly 300 years of continuous business. I am sure there are more examples of behind-the-scenes pressure of larger banks on smaller. More often this pressure has the purpose of forcing the smaller banks to throw individual customers out. A company I own part of is regularly evicted from Swiss banks since we work with software for bitcoin. That is the only reason. This perspective is frightening because it aims at the big banks being able to decide who, globally, has access to the banking system and not. This must be seen in combination with the war against cash. In the big cities in Sweden you are not able to buy a sandwich at several large and small restaurant- and hotel chains, without a bank card. Once you are boycotted by the banks, you are really _out_ of society, something which will of course in the future be used not only against bitcoin people but also politically.
3. I mentioned the banks´ war against cash. This is a second factor that makes bitcoin necessary. Banks and politicians work successfully to abolish anonymous money in European countries, where Sweden is the experiment shop. What happens there always spreads, and in Sweden they are well on their way.
All the best,
Carl Lundstrom ([email protected])
I WILL POST ANY FURTHER ANSWERS HERE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Llew,
- You write that one group of people who have not adopted bitcoin during its first six years, because they are so poor that they have no currency at all , will be the first to adopt bitcoin. How old are you?
- You think that offering a bank-independent payment system is “covered in our values” and then you present your appalling argument for not covering it. We are still talking about the 8 preambles.
- The banking/politics maffia´s war against cash is _not_ covered in the preambles or mentioned at all anywhere in the document.
What you do cover is the “losses associated with card fraud” and “lacking security in traditional payment system”. Exactly who´s business is that? Who do you think you´re working for?
Now on to bullet points, where you count seven “rights” for that should not be impeded by “humans”: All of these “rights” (you probably mean “legal options to”) are already present in almost all countries in the world. And in remaining countries, (Russia, is there any more?), bitcoin is thriving outside of the legal system, providing much needed competition to the establishment. Your reasoning behind these bullet points is understandable: With this manifesto, all you need to do to succeed is to put your feet on your desk.
Llew, you are better advised to seek a career in politics or organized crime. There is a vacancy in Hillary Clintons campaign office. If you are eyeing a position at a bank, go apply for it. We are not here to help you with your career. You will be of no use to the bitcoin community.
Carl Lundström
+41 763 262630
From: Llew Claasen [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: den 29 oktober 2016 13:25
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Important update for foundation members
Hi Carl
Thanks for your notes.
One of the reasons that we've drafted the manifesto is to ensure that we're clear on what we're trying to do and to be clear on what our members can expect from us. Our manifesto will not ring true for everyone and that is a function of having different philosophies of what Bitcoin should be.
My further comments as follows:
1. Poorest people in the world (ie. in developing markets) are most likely to adopt bitcoin as a currency first, because existing solutions don't serve them. They will be important early adopters on the consumer side.
2. I think this is covered in our values. This is a fight that we can't win in the short term and picking a fighting at that scale right now will just put a big target on bitcoin for regulators. It's precisely this centralized control, surveillance and bullying that will drive adoption of bitcoin.
3. Also covered in the values.
Thanks again & best wishes. Feel free to reach out at any time.
llew
Llew Claasen
Executive Director
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Carl Lundstrom <[email protected]> wrote:
Write above this block to post a reply. [View conversation in MailChimp]
Carl Lundstrom ([email protected]) wrote:
Thanks for reaching out! If the preambles should be there at all, they serve to indicate the purpose or the reason of the whole engagement. I don´t agree with the focus you are demonstrating.
1. The poorest people in the world are mentioned repeatedly, as a main element of our engagement in bitcoin. But please - those people who live on $3,10 per day are those that have, and will have, the least of all people to do with bitcoin. Since you mention no other group of people, your piece implies the opposite. It is commendable to want to work for an increase in bitcoin usage among starving Africans and for an increase in their incomes, but other fora are better suited for that.
2. Secondly you overlook a very large problem that bitcoin is on the way of solving - the fact that the banking system is becoming a worldwide monopoly power, from which not even banks themselves are safe. In 2012, the oldest Swiss bank, Wegelin /en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wegelin_%26_Co.> , refused to expose its US resident customers to American authorities. Shortly thereafter, commercial US banks decided to exclude Bank Wegelin from the interbank US dollar market in New York, and threatened with other boycott measures – which made the further business of the bank commercially impossible. The bank still refused to expose its customers and preferred to close shop after nearly 300 years of continuous business. I am sure there are more examples of behind-the-scenes pressure of larger banks on smaller. More often this pressure has the purpose of forcing the smaller banks to throw individual customers out. A company I own part of is regularly evicted from Swiss banks since we work with software for bitcoin. That is the only reason. This perspective is frightening because it aims at the big banks being able to decide who, globally, has access to the banking system and not. This must be seen in combination with the war against cash. In the big cities in Sweden you are not able to buy a sandwich at several large and small restaurant- and hotel chains, without a bank card. Once you are boycotted by the banks, you are really _out_ of society, something which will of course in the future be used not only against bitcoin people but also politically.
3. I mentioned the banks´ war against cash. This is a second factor that makes bitcoin necessary. Banks and politicians work successfully to abolish anonymous money in European countries, where Sweden is the experiment shop. What happens there always spreads, and in Sweden they are well on their way.
All the best,
Carl Lundstrom ([email protected])
Jump to: