[ANN] Bitcoin Foundation

[adamas]

I'm ambivalent about this project. The gap between the individual and the business memberships is completely out of proportion. Are we now heading for a two-tier bitcoin community? 

[The_Duke]

Q: Is this the infamous September Announcement?

Yes.

So the bitcoin foundation (which had nothing to do with founding bitcoin and created itself without involvement from the bitcoin community or its creator) gets a start as some incredibly overhyped Announcement (yeah, with a capital A apparently).
THIS is that big announcement that would bring more stability to bitcoin? A self proclaimed "bitcoin foundation" that on its own decides how to best help bitcoin?
To me, this just looks like a lot of e-peening by a bunch of people who on their own have become too invested in bitcoin and who are in effect decentralizing it by pulling to much attention and too much involvement onto themselves, thereby hindering the openness and freedom of bitcoin.
Why does something that is supposed to be uncontrolled and decentralized need a centralized body to control anything? What if the Bitcoin Foundation starts doing or saying things that a lot of bitcoin users feel is harmful to bitcoin? Can we replace the people in bitcoin foundation?

It will give the "outside world" (filled with evil bankers, corporations and goverments) a centralized point from which to influence bitcoin. (And whoever thinks they will influence it in a direction that is good for bitcoin is just being naive) They can now just talk to THE "Bitcoin Foundation", which happens to also include the major developers, the ones controlling the trademarks, etc.
Under the flag of "not for profit" bitcoin seems to get commercialized.

If you are worried about the direction of the Bitcoin Foundation and the members of the board you should join the foundation and let your vote count.

If you read my post, you will see that that is only *one* of my concerns. I think the concept of a bitcoin foundation is against what bitcoin stands for, and me joining the foundation doesn't solve that.

[deeplink]

What if, say, banks or the US government wanted to destroy Bitcoin?

Can they now just buy their way into the Bitcoin Foundation (for e.g. with lots of sockpuppet memberships) and disrupt development?

[BitcoinBug]

It also worries me that you need to give away your anonymity to support this project.
Where will this precious data end up when shit hits the fan?

I agree, this doesn't even keep one of the core values of bitcoins, that is anonymity, kinda disappointed, I wanted to get a membership until I see have to provide a real address and real name.  

You can still donate anonymously

[tomaszsz]

Great  ! now bitcoin will have legal entity

[Polvos]

This is absolutely no needed in the bitcoin world. I don't think the bitcoin network needs a big fat target foundation "orienting" the coding or influencing users.

I don't see any utility in this foundation but helping some lazy ass journalist in understanding the bitcoin spirit answering a phone call. Just read the code or come to the forums to build an informed opinion!!!

The only influence the network needs is the power of the majority accepting and using the bitcoins.

[The_Duke]

This is absolutely no needed in the bitcoin world. I don't think the bitcoin network needs a big fat target foundation "orienting" the coding or influencing users.

I don't see any utility in this foundation but helping some lazy ass journalist in understanding the bitcoin spirit answering a phone call. Just read the code or come to the forums to build an informed opinion!!!

The only influence the network needs is the power of the majority accepting and using the bitcoins.

+1

[BitcoinINV]

Can you get the lawyer to talk to the S.E.C lol?

[marcus_of_augustus]

What does the "Foundation" actually do, that isn't happening already? What is the product or service that it provides? Seems something like a talk-shop, lobby, think-tank along those lines right?

Besides being able to curry favour with certain (unnamed) entities on the member's behalf, what does a member get in return for their bitcoins? A vote?

At the downside risk of painting a big, fat target for bitcoin attackers, I don't really see the balance of upside benefits, icbw.

Bkkcoins:

This feels like the beginning of the end to me. A good 'ol boys club where only the Bitcoin rich get influence. How else can they justify paying large dues? How is this foundation going to respond to government pressure to change the code, to regulate and control who uses Bitcoin and how? It seems like we're going from what was a decentralized system to one where the developers are directly under the influence of the major dues payers and will be, whatever they say now not withstanding, under direct government control.

Bitcoin is inherently different than Linux and one thing that brought many users together in using Bitcoin was that it had no central nexxus for control.

I know how you feel but the worst outcome here, as I see it, is the beginning of the end of the official 'Satoshi' client. In this game, the best software wins network majority. A centralised, compromised client offering weighed down by "the Foundation" can always be usurped by a more desirable client offering ... from wherever it springs ... although there is always that network warning key that Gavin holds that could be used to propagandise against upstart client "threats" I suppose.

Obligatory troll: would Gavin (or any dev) even tell us if they worked for a TLA ... recall he did sell the bitcoin traceability aspect via graph theory analysis in his talk to the CIA?

[Polvos]

It also worries me that you need to give away your anonymity to support this project.
Where will this precious data end up when shit hits the fan?

I agree, this doesn't even keep one of the core values of bitcoins, that is anonymity, kinda disappointed, I wanted to get a membership until I see have to provide a real address and real name. 

You can still donate anonymously

But I want a vote

You vote when you use bitcoins and install a client software that fits your needs. You don't need to break anonymity for that.

[bitfair]

This is a great step ahead, and will greatly benefit the proliferation of Bitcoin.

Those who feel that this foundation does not represent their ideals should rather create their own foundation that does. How is that for freedom and decentralization?? This foundation does nothing to change what the bitcoin protocol is, so I cannot understand all the whining. (And I am sure the developers would even accept your new foundation helping to pay for the development too!)

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

That's just wordplay.

Wordplay matters.
You name the organization like that, and many newbies will consider it is the project founder and maintainer. They will think such foundation is responsible for the project, as the Tor Project organization is pretty much responsible for the Tor project.

I'm already seeing dumb regulators going after "bitcoin server farms" in the Bitcoin Foundation. And the less dumb among them will probably try to influence this foundation (and the developers under it) somehow.

One good anology would be wikimedia foundation, they are developing the mediawiki software and at the same time are responsible for wikipedia.

He, and that's precisely a good example of how things may turn out not that good... wikipedia people can get quite censor-prone sometimes. People get in and try to push their agenda. I've seen some biased decisions there, particularly in the Portuguese version of it.

Of course, that doesn't prevent wikipedia from being a great resource to mankind. But wikipedia is not a potential threat to so many people as bitcoin is though (at least I don't think Encyclopedia Britanica and others have the same lobbying power bankers have)

[MatthewLM]

although there is always that network warning key that Gavin holds that could be used to propagandise against upstart client "threats" I suppose.

That is not the case. Other clients do not need to pay attention to bitcoin alert messages. They could even use their own keys but that would not propagate though other clients.

I'm guessing the satoshi client or whatever people call it these days will now be copyrighted under the bitcoin Foundation? The Foundation is essentially the vehicle for the development of that client?

Will the Foundation create a bitcoin specification paper? That's something I find is missing, and I don't know if any thought was made on that?

[Severian]

This is a great step ahead, and will greatly benefit the proliferation of Bitcoin...I cannot understand all the whining.

I don't either. People seem to trust Gavin enough to run the code that he and the dev team publish. People also seem to trust the network enough that they put their fiat into it in some form or another. The Free Software Foundation, the Linux Foundation, etc. are worthy models.

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

If you are worried about the direction of the Bitcoin Foundation and the members of the board you should join the foundation and let your vote count.

Brilliant!! Just like democracy!! This system that works so fucking well!!

[kiba]

He, and that's precisely a good example of how things may turn out not that good... wikipedia people can get quite censor-prone sometimes. People get in and try to push their agenda. I've seen some biased decisions there, particularly in the Portuguese version of it.

Dude, wikipedia people are not the wikimedia people. I know this because I am a former editor myself.

Of course, that doesn't prevent wikipedia from being a great resource to mankind. But wikipedia is not a potential threat to so many people as bitcoin is though (at least I don't think Encyclopedia Britanica and others have the same lobbying power bankers have)

The foundation have no more power other than being a decoy target for governments to target, which is a good thing.

[marcus_of_augustus]

This is a great step ahead, and will greatly benefit the proliferation of Bitcoin...I cannot understand all the whining.

I don't either. People seem to trust Gavin enough to run the code that he and the dev team publish. People also seem to trust the network enough that they put their fiat into it in some form or another. The Free Software Foundation, the Linux Foundation, etc. are worthy models.

I'm kind of offended that legitmate questioning and criticisms are being called "whining" ... when this project got off the ground criticisms were accepted as necessary to make it stronger ... whining works.

Not sure if you missed the memo, Bitcoin is about not having to trust ... I'm pretty sure Gavin welcomes us to not trust him ... I don't, you shouldn't either ... he probably shouldn't even trust himself.

[Technomage]

I think this is a very important step. Monumental step. Bitcoin will become more legitimate and more robust thanks to this. The developers do need funding because the whole project is getting too big, too serious, to develop only through voluntarism. Also there needs to be an organization that tries to push the positive picture of Bitcoin to the law makers as well. Bitcoin can be used even if it's made illegal but it won't be good for much after that, so an entity like this will make it more difficult to just ban Bitcoin.

I'm happy to be a member, unfortunately our company won't be a member in a long time.

[jim618]

I have just spent all the MultiBit donations, topped up with my own BTC, for a lifetime membership.

[Severian]

I'm kind of offended that legitmate questioning and criticisms are being called "whining"

Legit crit is never whining. I don't recall ever seeing you engage in whining, so no offense intended.

"Wah, this isn't what I want" isn't legit crit.

Not sure if you missed the memo, Bitcoin is about not having to trust ... I'm pretty sure Gavin welcomes us to not trust him ... I don't, you shouldn't either ... he probably shouldn't even trust himself.

I don't trust anyone I don't know or haven't had successful dealings with. Trust is based on experience. I trust that the developers have the best interests of the protocol and the network in mind when they develop.

I don't trust mtgox, so they don't get my money. But I do trust that Mark will be a good fit at the foundation.

From observing bitcoin for a couple of years and in my dealings with Gavin, I trust him to make a best effort do what he'll say. Likewise, I trust that this foundation will have the interests of Bitcoin in mind.

My trust can be broken if I see any changes in what my experience has been thus far.