[ANN] Bitcoin Foundation

[Atlas]

Unless Gavin accepts the "long-arm of government" through the "official" voice of The Bitcoin Foundation. Before you know it, you'll see government backdoors in the protocol and people would be swayed into accepting it with little question because "Standards".

If anything suspicious happens, I will be the first to abandon the "official" client then.
For now, such scenario seems highly improbable.

Let me make explain it in other words:

One does not simply pass The Federal Reserve Act and conquer a whole nation through private central banking. It happened in America, the most decentralized nation of them all with a clear constitution and rules of engagement. It can happen here in the Bitcoin realm.

There are people out there who are threatened by Bitcoin. They will try to manipulate culture and have people sway to their whim. This organization is perfect for that.

[hazek]

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)

I would like to echo this. The Bitcoin Foundation is a service which like any other layer on top of the core Bitcoin code must be and is optional. It can be a face for Bitcoin if their clients want it to be but it must not and can not control Bitcoin.

[Severian]

The Wizard of the 7% weekly returns said it quite a lot too. Are we going to get caught with "The Wizard of the bitcoin software development" too?

If you believe even 10% of that, you need to sell your bitcoins, disconnect from the network and uninstall your client.

IOW, if you believe this for one minute, you're a fool for staying vested in bitcoin.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

The name is important for a organization selfdeclared "the face" of my savings

Why are you putting something you can't afford to lose into an experiment?

Gavin Andresen says the exact same shit. It's very annoying. It's like him saying "It's my experiment. I will do whatever I want with it. Fuck you guys."
No, Bitcoin works fine as it is. Don't experiment with it and leave our money alone.

You behave like an illogical fool.
Bitcoin foundation has nothing **DIRECTLY** to do with the quality of Bitcoin source code.

This move changes nothing in the code. If the code stays working as well as it worked before (or even better), then there is nothing wrong about having a foundation which will speed up the work and create pro-bitcoin lobby in the bloody congress, for example.

[Atlas]

The Wizard of the 7% weekly returns said it quite a lot too. Are we going to get caught with "The Wizard of the bitcoin software development" too?

If you believe even 10% of that, you need to sell your bitcoins, disconnect from the network and uninstall your client.

IOW, if you believe this for one minute, you're a fool for staying vested in bitcoin.

http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/1677831808/i-like-this-planet-you-get-off-futurama_2_.png

We will be defending our assets until the end. No foundation, no man, no development team will have a majority say over our money as long as we can fight it off.

[Atlas]

The name is important for a organization selfdeclared "the face" of my savings

Why are you putting something you can't afford to lose into an experiment?

Gavin Andresen says the exact same shit. It's very annoying. It's like him saying "It's my experiment. I will do whatever I want with it. Fuck you guys."
No, Bitcoin works fine as it is. Don't experiment with it and leave our money alone.

You behave like an illogical fool.
Bitcoin foundation has nothing **DIRECTLY** to do with the quality of Bitcoin source code.

This move changes nothing in the code. If the code stays working as well as it worked before (or even better), then there is nothing wrong about having a foundation which will speed up the work and create pro-bitcoin lobby in the bloody congress, for example.

Why should they be the only power lobbying congress for their selected companies? Why should they be the only ones paying developer salaries then? If they are the one with the funding and clout, then why wouldn't they be using that to shape Bitcoin for their interests and interests beyond? You really think they are selfless and perfect individuals? You really don't think Gavin and other devs could be bribed with salaries that come with stipulations?

What stops the Rothschilds from donating millions to this foundation to shape Bitcoin to their whim under the legitimacy of Gavin? Gavin already surrendered to the CIA.

You trust people too much.

[vess]

Hi all,

Thanks for the vigorous discussion and debate! I'm enjoying reading most of it.  :-) If you check my logs, you'll see I don't spend a ton of time on the forums, but I wanted to say a quick 'hello' and throw out a few thoughts / next steps.

• Confirmation of Payments: We need this, bad. Confirmations are easy to do, but we were so sick of waiting to launch we figured we'd do it after launch. Sorry! I would anticipate tomorrow we'll get notifications out.
• Speaking of which, WOW! We've had people from over 25 countries sign up already! Thanks!! It's super exciting to see.
• The general response has been overwhelmingly positive, and I appreciate that. We're all throwing in time and money to see this go forward, and I think it will be a great thing for Bitcoin. That said, I know some of you are worried. Tomorrow I'll do a reddit AMA, (well AMAA) and I'll look forward to discussing questions, comments and concerns in a slightly easier-to-manage q&a format. So, look for the link.
• I'm looking forward to digging in with thoughts on theymos' opinions -- some I disagree with, but all seem worth talking over
• Graeme's worries about miners -- I HEART miners, and I have some thoughts about where they/we fit. I'll look forward to discussing that as well.
• Bylaws -- Patrick is doing something super cool and publishing the bylaws on github. (tonight maybe?) The next board meeting is mid-October, and I would LOVE to look over pull requests on the bylaws at that meeting. Our intention is that members pester their board seats with thoughts, improvements, ideas, etc. to help steer the organization.

Finally, I can confirm that Satoshi is a Founding Member. That is all.

[kjj]

One of Bitcoin's biggest selling points is that it is NOT centralized. I've emphasized that fact when endorsing its use to others.

It's not about "Gavin's foundation". It's about any foundation. The people involved with pioneering this foundation are some of the ones I admire most in the Bitcoin community. That doesn't mean I think this is automatically a good idea. To the contrary this is the first thing I've really considered a real threat to Bitcoin succeeding. In fact, it's a part of the problem of power that these widely-admired people are the ones pioneering this move toward centralization.

EDIT: in my view, any sort of foundation Bitcoin needs for success (if it needs any) should necessarily limit its role and power as much as possible. For example, think what would happen if it did the reverse...

Bitcoin is just as decentralized today as it was yesterday, and it will be just as decentralized tomorrow too.

This is a trade association, not an evil wizard.  Where do you people think it is going to acquire all of this power to do evil?

[alexanderanon]

Unless Gavin accepts the "long-arm of government" through the "official" voice of The Bitcoin Foundation. Before you know it, you'll see government backdoors in the protocol and people would be swayed into accepting it with little question because "Standards".

If anything suspicious happens, I will be the first to abandon the "official" client then.
For now, such scenario seems highly improbable.

Let me make explain it in other words:

One does not simply pass The Federal Reserve Act and conquer a whole nation through private central banking. It happened in America, the most decentralized nation of them all with a clear constitution and rules of engagement. It can happen here in the Bitcoin realm.

There are people out there who are threatened by Bitcoin. They will try to manipulate culture and have people sway to their whim. This organization is perfect for that.

American politics != Bitcoin version adoption.

Perhaps you don't understand that difference between democracy in open-source development and democracy in representative government. They're very different things.

[Polvos]

then there is nothing wrong about having a foundation which will speed up the work and create pro-bitcoin lobby in the bloody congress, for example.

WTF? are you thinking all the userbase live in the USA? Stop acting like all the users or the developers must obbey one unique country.

That's why bitcoin is decentralized!!!

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

What most of the people here are missing is that the foundation got founded, because Bitcoin is going mainstream.

It is not possible to go mainstream without any official body that will represent us, comercially & legally. Ever.
The real world is not decentralized as Bitcoin network is, so we need some kind of gateway between both worlds.

This is the basic and real reason the foundation was created

[Atlas]

One of Bitcoin's biggest selling points is that it is NOT centralized. I've emphasized that fact when endorsing its use to others.

It's not about "Gavin's foundation". It's about any foundation. The people involved with pioneering this foundation are some of the ones I admire most in the Bitcoin community. That doesn't mean I think this is automatically a good idea. To the contrary this is the first thing I've really considered a real threat to Bitcoin succeeding. In fact, it's a part of the problem of power that these widely-admired people are the ones pioneering this move toward centralization.

EDIT: in my view, any sort of foundation Bitcoin needs for success (if it needs any) should necessarily limit its role and power as much as possible. For example, think what would happen if it did the reverse...

Bitcoin is just as decentralized today as it was yesterday, and it will be just as decentralized tomorrow too.

This is a trade association, not an evil wizard.  Where do you people think it is going to acquire all of this power to do evil?

Implied legitimacy, clout and blind trust by the community.

[Atlas]

Unless Gavin accepts the "long-arm of government" through the "official" voice of The Bitcoin Foundation. Before you know it, you'll see government backdoors in the protocol and people would be swayed into accepting it with little question because "Standards".

If anything suspicious happens, I will be the first to abandon the "official" client then.
For now, such scenario seems highly improbable.

Let me make explain it in other words:

One does not simply pass The Federal Reserve Act and conquer a whole nation through private central banking. It happened in America, the most decentralized nation of them all with a clear constitution and rules of engagement. It can happen here in the Bitcoin realm.

There are people out there who are threatened by Bitcoin. They will try to manipulate culture and have people sway to their whim. This organization is perfect for that.

American politics != Bitcoin version adoption.

Perhaps you don't understand that difference between democracy in open-source development and democracy in representative government. They're very different things.

All I know is every banking institution and technology in the world has been conquered through proxies, deceit and corruption. Every central bank in the world has been sold out to private individuals regardless of good intentions and rule of law.

[bracek]

who ever doesn't like this new development with foundation can vote with their bitcoin,
just sell,
it is that easy

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

then there is nothing wrong about having a foundation which will speed up the work and create pro-bitcoin lobby in the bloody congress, for example.

WTF? are you thinking all the userbase live in the USA? Stop acting like all the users or the developers must obbey one unique country.

Actually, I'm not from USA. But USA government will probably have one of the most important roles in fighting or endorsing bitcoin, so that's where my choice of words came from.

[Atlas]

who ever doesn't like this new development with foundation can vote with their bitcoin,
just sell,
it is that easy

No, you sell. We will be fighting to keep the network as it is.

This is not an experiment. This is not a toy. This is real money, real value and a new frontier in liberty. We will not be losing it to a central authority.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

Unless Gavin accepts the "long-arm of government" through the "official" voice of The Bitcoin Foundation. Before you know it, you'll see government backdoors in the protocol and people would be swayed into accepting it with little question because "Standards".

If anything suspicious happens, I will be the first to abandon the "official" client then.
For now, such scenario seems highly improbable.

Let me make explain it in other words:

One does not simply pass The Federal Reserve Act and conquer a whole nation through private central banking. It happened in America, the most decentralized nation of them all with a clear constitution and rules of engagement. It can happen here in the Bitcoin realm.

There are people out there who are threatened by Bitcoin. They will try to manipulate culture and have people sway to their whim. This organization is perfect for that.

American politics != Bitcoin version adoption.

Perhaps you don't understand that difference between democracy in open-source development and democracy in representative government. They're very different things.

All I know is every banking institution and technology in the world has been conquered through proxies, deceit and corruption. Every central bank in the world has been sold out to private individuals regardless of good intentions and rule of law.

You simply cannot corrupt and deceit source code, as long as there are enough eyes looking at it.
It is close to impossible.

The human factor is always the weakest factor. The source code factor - that's another story.

[jgarzik]

All hail the vocal minority! I'm starting to wonder how much they get paid. Does that make me crazy too?   

At the moment, the vast majority of the dev team (all?) get paid... nothing at all for working on bitcoin.

We're fortunate to have the chance to pay Gavin to devote his full attention to bitcoin.  Another developer might be securing permission to use a small part of his work week on bitcoin.

Paypal, the US dollar, the Euro, etc. have collectively thousands of programmers to work on keeping it all secure.  We have the world's first decentralized global currency, and we have... a few unpaid devs.

This is where the Bitcoin Foundation can really help.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

who ever doesn't like this new development with foundation can vote with their bitcoin,
just sell,
it is that easy

No, you sell. We will be fighting to keep the network as it is.

This is not an experiment. This is not a toy. This is real money, real value and a new frontier in liberty. We will not be losing it to a central authority.

You are a bloody madman. **Nobody** is centralizing Bitcoin any more through creating a foundation than it was centralized since today. Nothing changed.

If we don't like the code, we can start our own foundation, and condemn the old foundation.

[Atlas]

Unless Gavin accepts the "long-arm of government" through the "official" voice of The Bitcoin Foundation. Before you know it, you'll see government backdoors in the protocol and people would be swayed into accepting it with little question because "Standards".

If anything suspicious happens, I will be the first to abandon the "official" client then.
For now, such scenario seems highly improbable.

Let me make explain it in other words:

One does not simply pass The Federal Reserve Act and conquer a whole nation through private central banking. It happened in America, the most decentralized nation of them all with a clear constitution and rules of engagement. It can happen here in the Bitcoin realm.

There are people out there who are threatened by Bitcoin. They will try to manipulate culture and have people sway to their whim. This organization is perfect for that.

American politics != Bitcoin version adoption.

Perhaps you don't understand that difference between democracy in open-source development and democracy in representative government. They're very different things.

All I know is every banking institution and technology in the world has been conquered through proxies, deceit and corruption. Every central bank in the world has been sold out to private individuals regardless of good intentions and rule of law.

You simply cannot corrupt and deceit source code, as long as there are enough eyes looking at it.
It is close to impossible.

The human factor is always the weakest factor. The source code factor - that's another story.

If humans interpret the Bitcoin source code standardization of The Bitcoin Foundation as legitimate and as the sole authority, the Bitcoin source code can change with no question as long as this authority makes the changes. The process will turn into a cult of personality. Bitcoin will rest in the hands of a single organization.