Pages:
Author

Topic: Should Peter Vessenes resign as the Executive Director for Bitcoin Foundation ? - page 9. (Read 24387 times)

legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1005
tl;dr : Luke-jr (and some part sepa) made the call for the network to return to 0.7.xx fork, not Gavin or the BF.

So, basically, the idea was adopted simply because it was good, and not because of some imputed authority of its proponent?

That's actually a good thing.

I think the concept of this thread may be mistaken.  The question isn't really whether some guy should resign from some foundation, but whether we should even be making decisions based on the opinion of some foundation.  Really, who cares what BCF thinks?  Am I the only person practically unaware of the activities of this entity?
legendary
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349
Eadem mutata resurgo
I suggest a sister poll: I can vote because I'm a Foundation member: y/n
  The only time it made a decision of importance that I noticed, it was actually a reasonably good decision (on the fork).  If they had come to a staggeringly idiotic decision, I think most of the miners would have just ignored it.

Actually, you can read the #bitcoin-dev logs and see that the decision/suggestion to have miners go back to the 0.7.XX fork was actually made by luke-jr (and in some part sepa who backed his thinking). Gavin's first (and I think only call) was for "the longest chain wins" ... i.e. at that point that would have meant remaining on 0.8 fork and the chaos that would have ensued.

tl;dr : Luke-jr (and some part sepa) made the call for the network to return to 0.7.xx fork, not Gavin or the BF.
hero member
Activity: 504
Merit: 500
Anybody can regulate bitcoin but nobody should control it.
Buy bitcoins when they are cheap and sell them when they are expensive and they will be regulated.
The US government may also buy bitcoins  how much they wish and so they could regulate it. Of course other governments may trade also with it. Bitcoins are for all.
If with regulation is meant control over the blockchain then this is undesirable. Any other control over the bitcoin transactions or exchanges or mining pools is also undesirable.
I think he should explain more precisely what he was meaning with regulation.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1005
I suggest a sister poll: I can vote because I'm a Foundation member: y/n

That makes sense.  Personally, I didn't vote in the poll because I don't give a fuck.  I don't give a fuck about the Bitcoin Foundation, either.  I've managed to use BTC over a year without knowing or caring about the membership of this entity.  The only time it made a decision of importance that I noticed, it was actually a reasonably good decision (on the fork).  If they had come to a staggeringly idiotic decision, I think most of the miners would have just ignored it.
donator
Activity: 1419
Merit: 1015
We don't need a Bitcoin Foundation. We need a Bitcoin PAC.

Early adopters used Bitcoin for the liberty it provides. Freedom from government oversight, bureaucracy, and often outright theft.

If the government has a problem with Bitcoin, it's the government that should change, and those who claim to speak for the community should be advocating as such.

I don't care what they regulate on the fiat end, but Bitcoin is ours.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
Governments cant regulate mathematics, which is the basis of bitcoin. Its like trying to regulate gravity.

Try flying a hot air balloon over the White House.  Grin
donator
Activity: 1466
Merit: 1048
I outlived my lifetime membership:)
I suggest a sister poll: I can vote because I'm a Foundation member: y/n
hero member
Activity: 490
Merit: 500
Speaking of which, it's too bad we don't have a project leader with the kind of balls Linus has.

I remember Gavin Andresen setting dollar bills on fire in an early interview. Apart from that, he's the epitome of political correctness. (Just waiting for Gavin to pop in with his two cents - as he has a magical ability to spot whenever his name is mentioned on the forum. Wink)

This.
hero member
Activity: 840
Merit: 1000
Governments cant regulate mathematics, which is the basis of bitcoin. Its like trying to regulate gravity.

They can't "regulate gravity" but they can pretty much forbid you to skydive for example.

We should not be so arrogant. Governments can be dangerous to Bitcoin.

Any structure of power can be dangerous, even bitcoin can be dangerous.
So this is far from a simple decision.

On the one hand we cannot trust individuals or organsisations to act in the best interest of everybody, on the other hand we have to fix that with overarching control structures which also can act in their own interest.
The trick is, i think, to decide in a democratic way what we expect of a thing like bitcoin and have that protected in some way.
For now, i'm not sure there is a consensus about what bitcoin is to society so it's going to be very difficult to even start thinking about how to regulate it in a non-destructive way.
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
How do we know that's what he really believes?  

This is part of the problem. We don't.

And from what I have seen, I haven't been impressed.

We need someone more visible, articulate, and more of a leader.

He's already admitted he's open to someone else taking over the directorship of the foundation. That's not a good start.

What about the BitPay guy, still a bitcoin business person, but the presentations I've seen from him are of very high quality:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1702464



Galippi would be perfect.
legendary
Activity: 1153
Merit: 1012
Bitcoin foundation should resign from Bitcoin.


This.

There are other ways to pay Gavin.

Bitcoin does not need lobbying and marketing crap from the TBF. TBF only serves as a entrance gate for regulation and centralization.

Vessenes should fix his crappy exchange and otherwise STFU, 'cause he hasn't been elected to speak for the BTC community.
sr. member
Activity: 337
Merit: 250
If there is some sort of internal regulation right in the Bitcoin protocol, or anything similar, I won't upgrade to the new protocol.  Bitcoin needs no regulation.  Bitcoin is the currency of Economic Freedom.
full member
Activity: 218
Merit: 100
For the record: A dilettante is a person who enjoys the arts or someone who engages in a field as an amateur out of casual interest rather than as a profession.

No.  In popular speech, "dilettante" refers to someone who flits from field to field, never acquiring anything more than superficial knowledge of a given subject.  It's typically used pejoratively.  A "dilettante" originally referred to an admirer of the arts, but hasn't been used in that manner since the 18th century.

If you have any doubt as to how the word is used in today's world, google the phrase "he's a dilettante"  (with quotes) and see what comes up.
full member
Activity: 234
Merit: 100
Bitcoin foundation should resign from Bitcoin.
legendary
Activity: 1988
Merit: 1012
Beyond Imagination
“Right now you have a bunch of anarchistic market dilettantes who don’t understand how markets work and don’t understand the perils of markets,” he said. “People who understand markets need to get involved.”

The most important is to understand the recent crash, is it purely based on psychology/market behavior or manipulated by some large players? I think the latter is more likely, since they start the DDOS at the same time as mass sell off

For a small exchange and such low market capital, it is very easy to manipulate
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 250
Governments can be dangerous to Bitcoin.

Bitcoin is far more dangerous to the powers that be than they are to Bitcoin.
legendary
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349
Eadem mutata resurgo
But for the rest of us "market anarchists dillentantes", we are free to ignore Vesseness's pleas to subjugation.

For the record: A dilettante is a person who enjoys the arts or someone who engages in a field as an amateur out of casual interest rather than as a profession.

Like a lawyer or business analyst who dabbles in cryptography .... but probably wants someone else to secure his bitcoins might be a good example I imagine?
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000
But for the rest of us "market anarchists dillentantes", we are free to ignore Vesseness's pleas to subjugation.

For the record: A dilettante is a person who enjoys the arts or someone who engages in a field as an amateur out of casual interest rather than as a profession.
legendary
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349
Eadem mutata resurgo
What power does the BCF have that prevents everyone from just ignoring it?

They pay the wages of the lead dev. Gavin Andresen, so in that sense they have some "power" I suppose.

But for the rest of us "market anarchist dilletantes", we are free to ignore Vesseness's pleas to subjugation.

I'm interested to see what Jon Matonis has to say, AFAIK he is still on the board of the BF, and has been stridently anti-regulation and damning of those who invite it in the past.

Maybe Vesseness is just running his yap off and speaking out of turn in an attempt to calm the troubled bitcoin waters, like some kind of messiah figure or something?
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000
How do we know that's what he really believes?  

This is part of the problem. We don't.

And from what I have seen, I haven't been impressed.

We need someone more visible, articulate, and more of a leader.

He's already admitted he's open to someone else taking over the directorship of the foundation. That's not a good start.

What about the BitPay guy, still a bitcoin business person, but the presentations I've seen from him are of very high quality:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1702464

Pages:
Jump to: