Gavin is an Agent

[bambou]

facts:

1/ CIA "interview"
          https://bitcointalk.org/?topic=6652.0
          https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113609.0

2/ After screwing over at the very "honorable" TBF, he has now joined the MIT's Media LAB
          https://bitcoinmagazine.com/20132/gavin-andresen-core-developers-join-mits-digital-currency-initiative/
          http://www.media.mit.edu/files/sponsors.pdf

3/ Forking BS over and over again. now just before the Halving. hOw friggin convenient.
          https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcoin-git/commit/5f46da29fd02fd2a8a787286fd6a56f680073770





Say goodbye to Bitcoin. Sheeples.

[687_2]

facts:

1/ CIA "interview"
          https://bitcointalk.org/?topic=6652.0
          https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113609.0

2/ After screwing over at the very "honorable" TBF, he has now joined the MIT's Media LAB
          https://bitcoinmagazine.com/20132/gavin-andresen-core-developers-join-mits-digital-currency-initiative/
          http://www.media.mit.edu/files/sponsors.pdf

3/ Forking BS over and over again. now just before the Halving. hOw friggin convenient.
          https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcoin-git/commit/5f46da29fd02fd2a8a787286fd6a56f680073770





Say goodbye to Bitcoin. Sheeples.

Maybe. A fork will severely damage the price.

[AGD]

I voted yes, because it would be more fun to watch the story unfold 

[Elwar]

You are free to check the source code to see Gavin's contributions.

[inBitweTrust]

3/ Forking BS over and over again. now just before the Halving. hOw friggin convenient.
          https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcoin-git/commit/5f46da29fd02fd2a8a787286fd6a56f680073770

Looks like a good time to push for the hard fork as I expect transaction volume to skyrocket at or near the halving. If you are really concerned about his helpful contributions than please submit your own commit and let the network decide.

2/ After screwing over at the very "honorable" TBF, he has now joined the MIT's Media LAB

TBF was a honorable organization?

[pawel7777]

1- CIA wouldn't publicly interview their own agents (or potential ones)

2- TBF screwed themselves + stopped paying the devs in April. GA is still Chief Scientist though afaik.

3- Feel free to contribute yourself, offer alternative solutions or just stay on the old fork.

[hdbuck]

1- CIA wouldn't publicly interview their own agents (or potential ones)

2- TBF screwed themselves + stopped paying the devs in April. GA is still Chief Scientist though afaik.

3- Feel free to contribute yourself, offer alternative solutions or just stay on the old fork.

1/ Thats not an argument. Fact is Satoshi vanishes when Gavin is "invited" @CIA. but lol nobody is just "invited" there.. XD

2/ Gavin is/was an accomplice. Kinda like acknowledging their misbehavior by omission.

3/ I wouldnt call the 20Mb Fork a "contribution". More like a "retribution".. all the way back into USG's frame freaks.



Centralize & Control^TM

[albert11]

The "let the network decide" argument does not convince me really, when/if bitcoin becomes mainstream the majority of bitcoin users will use and rely on online wallets and exchanges, if these centralized companies collude together with big mining companies they will have the biggest blockchain and people won't even have the choice to change blockchain if they want to keep their money, that's why the ecosystem should be as much diversified as possible.
If there is 2 bitcoins blockchains it means we will have 2 differents bitcoin price, people will ultimately go on the bitcoin that is the most valuable and then it's going to snowball effect...

I think the only real way the consensus mechanism would work as it should is if the blockchain is forked in a way that anyone can mine and earn bitc, maybe by putting some sort of limit on processing power/node, decentralized mining is the only thing that will preserve integrity of the protocol IMO

[Kaneki]

if in view of its contribution in the world Bitcoin should he not agent, but we can not guess what is inside his head could have been in changing his mind and became Agent.

[inBitweTrust]

Everyone who is against the blockchain limit being raised has plenty of time to submit their own commits and or finding alternative solutions and working on them like the lightning network.

Its not like we haven't discussed this for years , a plan put in place many months ago, and now you can see the actual commit that is delayed 1 year. If anything Gavin is being extremely careful and this is changing at a snails pace.

Open source projects do not work with complaints. Either submit your own commit, stay on the old chain, or work on an alternative proposal that solves the 3-7tps limitation to convince all the other devs who support the 20MB hard fork.

[Kakmakr]

Gavin got a lot of money to do someone's work, and I guess it's good payment to maintain a secure protocol.
Only a small portion of Satoshi's original code is still in use today but the core principle was kept. Most of the developers agree that Satoshi's programming was average to say the least, but his idea was excellent.
Gavin was one of the people who cleanup up that code, and he should be acknowledged for that. ^frown^

[bambou]

This is it, Bitcoin's big anti-fragility test!

Being attacked from the very inside by so called "Chief Scientist" to fit his masters agenda.

I sure hope it will slam them right back in their faces, into their feces!



ps: @inbitwetrust TBF "honorable"? lol no. that was me being ironic. As if USG sponsored MIT LAB would be any different, if not worst.

[louise123]

1- CIA wouldn't publicly interview their own agents (or potential ones)

2- TBF screwed themselves + stopped paying the devs in April. GA is still Chief Scientist though afaik.

3- Feel free to contribute yourself, offer alternative solutions or just stay on the old fork.

1/ Thats not an argument. Fact is Satoshi vanishes when Gavin is "invited" @CIA. but lol nobody is just "invited" there.. XD

2/ Gavin is/was an accomplice. Kinda like acknowledging their misbehavior by omission.

3/ I wouldnt call the 20Mb Fork a "contribution". More like a "retribution".. all the way back into USG's frame freaks.



Centralize & Control^TM

Now that you guys mention it.
Can anyone give me the link for when Satoshi said: "I am moving on, it's in good hands with Gavin and the guys"

I have been through Satoshi's posts but it's not there.

[inBitweTrust]

Now that you guys mention it.
Can anyone give me the link for when Satoshi said: "I am moving on, it's in good hands with Gavin and the guys"

I have been through Satoshi's posts but it's not there.

He turned over control of the source code repository and alert key functions of the software to Gavin and could have warned us in many other ways after he left if he was concerned. Gavin was one of the few people Satoshi trusted to have private communications with as well.

I sure hope it will slam them right back in their faces, into their feces!

What are you going to do about it besides whine and complain?

[Keyara]

What was his role in bitcoin development before joining CIA?

[louise123]

Now that you guys mention it.
Can anyone give me the link for when Satoshi said: "I am moving on, it's in good hands with Gavin and the guys"

I have been through Satoshi's posts but it's not there.

He turned over control of the source code repository and alert key functions of the software to Gavin and could have warned us in many other ways after he left if he was concerned. Gavin was one of the few people Satoshi trusted to have private communications with as well.

-snip-

That's very nice.
I am really glad that Satoshi trusted Gavin, I can sleep more peaceful now  
I am sure Satoshi had his reasons to hand it over to Gavin.

That is not what I asked though.
I asked: Can anyone give me the link for when Satoshi said: "I am moving on, it's in good hands with Gavin and the guys"

Thanks  

[Lauda]

Please don't get the 'hard fork is bad' nonsense started again. I've just read a comment:"Gavin who do you think you are?"; and I can't believe this.
Why do individuals that are anti-fork think they matter? If we look at contributions to the code I think that Gavin has contributed the most (correct me if I'm wrong).
Anyone who did not do something that is comparable to this (buying is irrelevant!) should not complain. You're free to leave at anytime.
If you didn't notice this is on Gavin's Github page.

Also, no Gavin is not an agent. He's the director of the NSA.  

[Skunk Fu]

Please don't get the 'hard fork is bad' nonsense started again. I've just read a comment:"Gavin who do you think you are?"; and I can't believe this.
Why do individuals that are anti-fork think they matter? If we look at contributions to the code I think that Gavin has contributed the most (correct me if I'm wrong).
Anyone who did not do something that is comparable to this (buying is irrelevant!) should not complain. You're free to leave at anytime.

Also, no Gavin is not an agent. He's the director of the NSA.  

HA!
I knew it. I just f*cking knew it 

[pawel7777]

1- CIA wouldn't publicly interview their own agents (or potential ones)

2- TBF screwed themselves + stopped paying the devs in April. GA is still Chief Scientist though afaik.

3- Feel free to contribute yourself, offer alternative solutions or just stay on the old fork.

1/ Thats not an argument. Fact is Satoshi vanishes when Gavin is "invited" @CIA. but lol nobody is just "invited" there.. XD

2/ Gavin is/was an accomplice. Kinda like acknowledging their misbehavior by omission.

3/ I wouldnt call the 20Mb Fork a "contribution". More like a "retribution".. all the way back into USG's frame freaks.



Centralize & Control^TM

1- That's not really an argument for or against. But using the common sense, if CIA was to recruit GA, they would far more likely approached him quietly, instead of letting him make public statements about the invitation. Seems to me Satoshi did freak out over wikileaks accepting bitcoins (see his 2nd latest post).

2- Sure, let's not blame the ones that misbehaved, lets blame GA for his 'omission'. Anyway, how's that an argument of him being an agent?

3- I was referring to 'your contribution'. Don't like the fork? Let's hear your ideas/solutions. Most of people seem to agree with the need of lifting the limits with some difference of opinions on details.

That being said, I think it's actually healthy to consider the possibility of GA or any other dev to be an agent, and properly examine any proposed changes and look for threats etc. But announcing that as a fact because of the reasons stated in the OP is just daft.

[inBitweTrust]

That is not what I asked though.
I asked: Can anyone give me the link for when Satoshi said: "I am moving on, it's in good hands with Gavin and the guys"

Thanks  

He expressed interest in moving on months before and made preparations in advance but never gave a farewell message and simply disappeared leaving everyone wondering. His only response years later was :
"I am not Dorian Nakamoto."