[ANN] Bitcoin Foundation

[MatthewLM]

The bitcoin Foundation is not a threat to the decentralised nature of the bitcoin network simply due to the fact many people are worried about that. It tells me people are worried about centralisation and hence would take actions to prevent it. The bitcoin Foundation is just one bitcoin organisation and doesn't require anyone to join it to use bitcoin or anything like that.

Already the development team is quite centralised some may argue, so this just adds an organisational layer. There will still be alternative clients, bitcoin services and businesses which may decide to have nothing to do with the Foundation.

[1715505648]

1715505648

[1715505648]

1715505648

[1715505648]

1715505648

[kiba]

...we require a real name and address for Individual members

W. T. F.

Real identity in Bitcoin world? I hope u'll remove this nonsense soon. Guys, u r supposed to solve problems without help of outer world. If u need an instrument - make it!

And how do you suppose we figure out if the half of the membership is actually ghost stuffed by a nefarious anonymous CIA operation?  

Foundation: Guys, 70% of the members in the bitcoin foundation want to deanonymize the network!
Us: Bullshit! People at the meetup say they're voting for anonymity!
Foundation: But they're real! They all paid a membership!
CIA: MUAHHAHAH! We are destroying bitcoin for our government master. Wait, this mean we have no anonymous way to fund our spying operation. What will we do?

Remember, anonymity cuts both way. They allows power for good, and for evil! Sometime, anonymity allows bad people to unmask an individual's financial privacy and get away with it.

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

And the foundation don't have the ability to compels the miners.

I understand this, I understand it remains free software, I understand they have all the right to create this thing and nobody can stop them etc etc.

I just don't appreciate it.

Do you want to bet that one year from now, if this organization is still up, many newbies coming by will believe "Bitcoin was created by the Bitcoin Foundation" or that the "Bitcoin Foundation decides the roadmap for the Bitcoin project and are responsible for it" etc? Or even that journalists will say such things?
Not to mention the risk of small manipulations. If they really don't even accept anonymous memberships, that already shows they miss some basic principles.

I would prefer if Bitcoin stayed just like E-mail: no "E-mail Foundation", no "E-mail phone number" etc, and everybody understands that very well. Nobody asks for an "authority over E-mail".

[shad0wbitz]

I think the mission statement for the fundation should read:

"To advance the interest of the biggest players in the industry (mtgox and bitinstant), who already have their hands on everything Bitcoin related. To annihilate competition and to foster camaraderie between the good ol'boys, and to elect a board of directors without any democratic input whatsoever from the true owners of Bitcoins: Its community. Finally, to provide a tax exempt vehicle to pay Gavin Andersen for developing open source, free software".

NO THANK YOU!. We have enough of the Bitinstant/MtGox vaporware and nonsense. I am going to pass on this one.

How about NOBODY that PROFIT from Bitcoin should be on the board? How about not having the SAME attorney for BitInstant and Roger Ver on the board of an "independent" fundation.

I am sorry, but this is a transvestite, just like the last organization that Charlie Shrem and Vorhees were involved with the scammer Matthew N. Wright http://dcao.org/

I hope this community REMEMBERS. I would urge anybody caring about Bitcoin to stay away from this monopoly.

[kiba]

Do you want to bet that one year from now, if this organization is still up, many newbies coming by will believe "Bitcoin was created by the Bitcoin Foundation" or that the "Bitcoin Foundation decides the roadmap for the Bitcoin project and are responsible for it" etc? Or even that journalists will say such things?
Not to mention the risk of small manipulations. If they really don't even accept anonymous memberships, that already shows they miss some basic principles.

The bitcoin project is de-facto the official standard bearer for the development of the bitcoin network. The Bitcoin Foundation is just formalizing it.

I would prefer if Bitcoin stayed just like E-mail: no "E-mail Foundation", no "E-mail phone number" etc, and everybody understands that very well. Nobody asks for an "authority over E-mail".

HTML5 is determined by a standard group. There's no evil people going around making HTML5 into a tool for government spying.

[Anth0n]

Seems like a good idea to have a foundation so that the public image of Bitcoin isn't just a bunch of drug dealers and money launderers.

When anything shady happens and Bitcoin is involved somehow, we can have official statements from the foundation and look professional.

[MatthewLM]

There is no bitcoin monopoly and there cannot be any forceful monopoly. The software is under an open-source license with no patents or anything. It's open software.

People choose to use MtGox as much as they do as their own choice. People are free to use alternatives. As bitcoin grows in size I suspect competition will grow with the exchanges.

[kiba]

NO THANK YOU!. We have enough of the Bitinstant/MtGox vaporware and nonsense. I am going to pass on this one.

How about NOBODY that PROFIT from Bitcoin should be on the board? How about not having the SAME attorney for BitInstant and Roger Ver on the board of an "independent" fundation.

Everyone who own a single bitcoin profit when the price rise. So no bitcoiners should be on the bitcoin board. Only paypal and mastercard and everyone who hate bitcoin should be on board.(They don't profit from bitcoin, remember?)

[boonies4u]

I would prefer if Bitcoin stayed just like E-mail: no "E-mail Foundation", no "E-mail phone number" etc, and everybody understands that very well. Nobody asks for an "authority over E-mail".

HTML5 is determined by a standard group. There's no evil people going around making HTML5 into a tool for government spying.

I'm absolutely certain that everybody understands how E-mail came about and continues to exist in the world today.  

[theymos]

It's good that the Foundation will be funding development and representing Bitcoin legally, but it's important that the ownership of Bitcoin-related assets doesn't become too centralized. In particular, the Foundation should not:
- Control bitcoin.org
- Control any DNS seeds, etc.
- Own copyright on the Bitcoin source code
- Own any patents
- Own the Bitcoin trademark (unless someone has to own it)

[theymos]

Does a PO box count as a "real address"?

How is the Founder board seat given away?

[shad0wbitz]

Does a PO box count as a "real address"?

How is the Founder board seat given away?

Exactly my point. Why aren't you on the board? You have been as instrumental (if not more) to Bitcoin than Charlie Shrem or Mark for that fact. I guess you have to run a highly profitable bitcoin business to be considered for the position.

[theymos]

I'm happy with the board selection.

[sebicas]

The Bitcoin Foundation is modeled on the Linux Foundation.

Do we get "elux@bitcoin.org" vanity addresses like with the Linux Foundation? (I'd like that.)

+1 to this idea!

[enmaku]

And of course the announcement of the month that I desperately wanted to be first to the press with happens at 3AM while I'm sound asleep.

Damn morning people.

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

The bitcoin project is de-facto the official standard bearer for the development of the bitcoin network. The Bitcoin Foundation is just formalizing it.

And is such formalization necessary? The potential for misunderstandings is big there.
If this was named "Gavin's Bitcoin Development Group" I'd probably be perfectly fine with it. "Bitcoin Foundation" is a lie in its own name, and will certainly provoke misunderstandings.

I would prefer if Bitcoin stayed just like E-mail: no "E-mail Foundation", no "E-mail phone number" etc, and everybody understands that very well. Nobody asks for an "authority over E-mail".

HTML5 is determined by a standard group. There's no evil people going around making HTML5 into a tool for government spying.

HTML5 doesn't have enemies. And HTML5 is not really significant to me, so I just don't care. About Bitcoin I do care though.

[shad0wbitz]

Everyone who own a single bitcoin profit when the price rise. So no bitcoiners should be on the bitcoin board. Only paypal and mastercard and everyone who hate bitcoin should be on board.(They don't profit from bitcoin, remember?)

I am trying to figure out if you are being facetious or are you trying to be serious. There is a sea of difference between an individual owning a couple of coins and profiting from perhaps speculations to a foundation who's board is controlled by the biggest monolithic structure in this industry: MtGox and BitInstant. They even share lawyers for Pete's sake! How is this a good idea? Am I missing something here?

[kjj]

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.

So, the Gates Foundation invented gates?  The Rockerfeller Foundation invented Rockerfellers?

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

Does a PO box count as a "real address"?

How is the Founder board seat given away?

He, you just made me realize that Satoshi himself wouldn't be able to be a member of it, if he wants to preserve his anonymity.

[EhVedadoOAnonimato]

So, the Gates Foundation invented gates?  The Rockerfeller Foundation invented Rockerfellers?

Perfect, name it "Gavin Foundation" then. I'm fine with that.