Topic: Who really owns and manages Bitcoin? (Read 986 times)

The really one who owns and manage bitcoins are those bitcoin enthusiast who continualy investing and patronizing it in their daily life routine, as long as there are people who believe in bitcoins including me.  We the communities own it and manage it also.

i think no one still know the reality and that is the plus point of bitcoin that still no one know about the owner of bitocin.some people are claiming that Satoshi is the owner of bitcoin. ever some claims that they are satoshi themselves. but they are just kidding and giving false statement.

No, you can't-- that is listing org members (and not even all of them since some have set themselves to private-- in fact, when you linked to it I noticed I was set to private and just fixed that, there are 22). It's the list of people who can be assigned to trouble tickets.

There is no set of people who can "approve code", except all the users of Bitcoin-- there are no automatic updates for a reason.

Absolutely!

• Log into GitHub.
• Go to the Bitcoin Core repository:
  https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin
• Click the "Fork" button (note, this does NOT fork the blockchain. It just creates a copy of the existing code and puts that copy under your control)

You'll have your own copy of the source code that you have control over and that will be 100% compatible with the existing Bitcoin Core.  Change it as much as you like, and as long as you don't change any of the consensus rules, or communications protocols, it will remain compatible with the existing Bitcoin Core.  Get your friends, family, and complete strangers all to start using your software. If enough people choose to use your code instead of the currently existing code, you will be the one in charge of what gets into bitcoin.  If your code becomes influential enough (the vast majority of users are choosing to use wallets that are based off of your code), and you change a consensus rule, then the blockchain will fork and your bitcoin will be the "real" bitcoin, while that old code that no longer has any influence will become irrelevant. Of course, if people don't like your consensus change, they can always go back to that old code, or can create their own code fork.  If too many people don't like the change you've made, then you'll lose influence to some other code that people like better.

Great answer Danny!


Does that mean that if I choose to create my own repository, it will work and be compatible with the current software running Bitcoin.

Maybe, these people are the first miners (I guess, friends of the creator of BTC). However,we shouldn't forget it can be Nakamoto, because Nakamoto can be a group of people from the very beginning

OP, you should not take any of these negative statements and comments too seriously.. You never know who is behind these comments and what their agendas are. Bitcoin have loads of enemies and

competitors and people are even paid to spread fud to try and damage it. No matter what changes are accepted, it will always be scrutinized by other people in the community and then we need to get

consensus from the majority to implement it. Nobody will just be able to sneak in malicious code.... but they still try. {Bitcoin XT} 

I do not exactly know "who" owns Bitcoin but as far as I know, bitcoin is owned by the community, for the community and the devs are only there for the improvement of the blockchain tech and fixing issues, if there are any.

It is not.


Which code? Electrum? MultiBit? Coinbase? F2Pool? Eligius? Bitcoin-Qt?  They each have their own developers and each have their own people in control.


It looks like you are only asking about the Bitcoin-Qt (also called the "Bitcoin Core") code? There is NOTHING OFFICIAL about that code.  That is just one repository that a group of developers have chosen to contribute to, and which some people choose to use.  It currently has a lot of influence only because a lot of people like to use it.  If people decided they liked a different repository instead, then that current repository would lose all its influence.


They are the people that have chosen to voluntarily spend a lot of their own time working on that version of the code.


They don't control all the source code. They only control Bitcoin Core.  Anyone else can create any code they want without any permission required from anyone.


Nope.  They just started contributing all on their own.


Well, it would be nice if more people would contribute, but I'm not going to force someone to contribute if they don't want to.


If the users are foolish enough to believe that anything those guys put out is automatically acceptable, then yes, they can exploit that foolishness.  If the users are astute enough to review changes and are careful not to run maliciously exploitative code, then no.


Then fork the code and convince the Bitcoin community to use your better code.  If you can convince enough of the community that your code is better, then those other developers become powerless.  If the community doesn't like your code and prefers the code that the other developers are putting out, then they can keep running the other code.  Either way, the community gets what they want.


No, they don't.  They only have power to approve the new code that is accepted into that particular GitHub repository.  You are welcome to create your own repository, choose what is accepted to your repository, convince other developers to contribute to your repository, and convince users to use your code.


Of course it does.  You can control your own version of the codebase all you want.  If you create something that other users want, then they will use your code instead of the other repository.


It is reviewed and discussed, and if the person in control of that repository is convinced to add it, he does.


Which is why it is reviewed and discussed by multiple developers.


As long as it doesn't do anything else that isn't wanted, then it will probably be accepted.  Or you could just add it to your own version so others that want the patch can have it.


Nope.  Anyone can change the code.  All you need to do is convince people to use your version.


They work on the code, and people like what they are doing, so people use the code that they create.


Effectively, yes.  They create code, and the community "votes" by either choosing to use the code that they create, or choosing to use someone else's code.


Yes, they could.


Probably.  Why would it matter?  Either they create code that people want, or they don't.

Bitcoin don't have any paid developer working for some payment thats why there is no any big announcement coming as bitcoin dev. However developer community dedicated for bitcoin are working voluntarily whenever it is needed thats why bitcoin is completely decentralized other than still million of coin unknown creator "satoshi" is holding.

i guess if someone wants to contribute he has to prove to be trustworthy.  but the codes being opensource created a lot of bitcoin like coins.
 this is why you can see there are tons of altcoins.

If anyone could just update the code would be complete chaos, of course. But how the hell did those 12 people came to be the maintainers of this HUGE project.

Were they democratically elected? Could they be criminals? Are they even the guys they say to be?

actually i believe that the community has a great power in this. imagine they add a code that you don't like (i can't give any example nothing comes to mind) but if a lot of users don't like it they will simply stop using bitcoin or stick to the old version and the new one will become abandoned by the community. so they will be forced to remedy that.

The problem is that there need to be some control, if anyone could just update the code whenever they please it would be pure chaos not to mention extremely risky for everyone.
And since there are no laws to protect the community, all we have is trust. Having a community where everyone is equal and there are no leaders sounds ideal but it wouldn't work in practice.

You can clearly see who can approve new code in GitHub here.

And here.

All of them are human. And it's human nature to favour a contribution from someone you know or yourself even if it's technically inferior.

I'm not technically proficient at all, but I've noticed Core types being very quick to pick apart any ideas that don't come from the inner sanctum. It seems to be a knee jerk reaction.

Exactly! Nobody knows how is the code of outside contributors is approved. One piece of code can make much sense to one developer and in the same time no sense to other developer!

And what is this code patches a security hole?

Why do u say that is so?

Where do u see proof that 12 people have the ultimate power to approve a new code?

~CfA~

I often read 'it's open source, anyone can contribute'. I'd love to know how many contributions from total outsiders have been integrated. I'm going to guess it's not very many.

Well, these 12 people have the ultimate power to approve the new code, which is too much of a power!

Being Open Source doesn't give you or the community any control over the codebase...