[ANN] Bitcoin Foundation

[misterbigg]

The Foundation isn't Bitcoin

The name suggest otherwise:



"The Bitcoin Foundation" literally means "The basis of Bitcoin", "The setting up of Bitcoin", and "The Bitcoin establishment."

Pardon my french, but who the fuck appointed these people to be official spokesmen of Bitcoin? I think most of the negative reaction to this announcement comes from the arrogance of a handful taking it upon themselves to proclaim to the world that they speak for everyone involved in Bitcoin. It reeks of a power grab.

There is probably a legitimate need to have an organization of this type but it could have been handled better. Of course, mistakes are how we learn so I guess this will go down in Bitcoin infamy.

[ChrisKoss]

Pardon my french, but who the fudgesickle appointed these people to be official spokesmen of Bitcoin? I think most of the negative reaction to this announcement comes from the arrogance of a handful taking it upon themselves to proclaim to the world that they speak for everyone involved in Bitcoin. It reeks of a power grab.

This could have been handled better.

What makes you think the Bitcoin Foundation is the "official spokesman" of Bitcoin?

This is just a group of people (who happen to be very well respected throughout the Bitcoin community) making an organization to advance Bitcoin.  Others have tried it, but this one apparently comes off as "official" because its organized, funded, and has the support of important Bitcoiners.  There is nothing "official" about it other than that many of the most trusted Bitcoiners believe in it.

[jgarzik]

Pardon my french, but who the fuck appointed these people to be official spokesmen of Bitcoin?

It is a community where everybody is free to speak their mind, including banding together to speak collectively.

laissez faire at its best, really.

I think most of the negative reaction to this announcement comes from the arrogance of a handful taking it upon themselves to proclaim to the world that they speak for everyone involved in Bitcoin. It reeks of a power grab.

I think most of the negative reaction comes from one or two high volume posters, probably imported from the SomethingAwful forums

[misterbigg]

What makes you think the Bitcoin Foundation is the "official spokesman" of Bitcoin?

Me personally, I don't think that the Bitcoin Foundation is the official mouthpiece of Bitcoin but it seems almost a certainty that anyone who does not know anything about Bitcoin and stumbles across "The Bitcoin Foundation" is going to make the assumption that they invented the protocol and have complete control over it.

[misterbigg]

It is a community where everybody is free to speak their mind, including banding together to speak collectively.

There's certainly nothing wrong with that but when six people get together and claim that they are the foundation of Bitcoin, with the implication that they speak for the entire community, that's a horse of an entirely different color.

FYI I am not from SomethingAwful, if that is your implication.

[ChrisKoss]

What makes you think the Bitcoin Foundation is the "official spokesman" of Bitcoin?

Me personally, I don't think that the Bitcoin Foundation is the official mouthpiece of Bitcoin but it seems almost a certainty that anyone who does not know anything about Bitcoin and stumbles across "The Bitcoin Foundation" is going to make the assumption that they invented the protocol and have complete control over it.

It would be laughable for the Foundation (or anyone) to try to claim complete control over Bitcoin.

Whenever I explain what CoinLab does, non-Bitcoiners always ask, "So your company invented/operates Bitcoin?" and I then I explain how we're just part of a diverse decentralized ecosystem.   Most people don't understand decentralized technologies, and that's just an inevitable educational hurdle you bump into with anyone just learning about Bitcoin.  

I've met 2/3 of the board members, and these guys are such strong believers in Bitcoin.  They know who invented it, why it's impossible for anyone to have complete control, and doubtless will be explaining these facts over and over to journalists, businessmen and regulators trying to wrap their heads around what Bitcoin is.

[kjj]

The Foundation isn't Bitcoin

The name suggest otherwise:



"The Bitcoin Foundation" literally means "The basis of Bitcoin", "The setting up of Bitcoin", and "The Bitcoin establishment."

Pardon my french, but who the fuck appointed these people to be official spokesmen of Bitcoin? I think most of the negative reaction to this announcement comes from the arrogance of a handful taking it upon themselves to proclaim to the world that they speak for everyone involved in Bitcoin. It reeks of a power grab.

There is probably a legitimate need to have an organization of this type but it could have been handled better. Of course, mistakes are how we learn so I guess this will go down in Bitcoin infamy.

Your screenshot is clearly from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/foundation.  What could you possibly have missed on that page?

6.  an institution financed by a donation or legacy to aid research, education, the arts, etc.: the Ford Foundation.

Every now and then, I like to click show/hide on an ignored user's post, just to see if I made the right decision before.  Thanks for confirming my judgment.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

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.

Unfortunately, whatever is determined to pay Gavin, the current remaining four will want the same compensation, if not more depending on the average salary standards of their respected trade. Then you have a couple other seats available, with those filling them expecting the same. And finally there's the pseudonym seat. Surely he's deserves the same wage. So let's do the math. Eight seats times a respectable salary of $50,000 USD/year equals $400,000 USD/year.

Somebody check my work.

~Bruno~

[BkkCoins]

Nothing in bitcoin happens without the consent of the majority of users, and that is by design.

I assume by majority of users you mean majority of devs with commit access? I use github and similar tools myself and know how they work. I'm not familiar with gitian but it sounds like it's more strict. But if the people with commit access are all paid by the foundation, or if even if enough of them are then it's the same result.

I'm not saying that they would slip something in unnoticed. I'm more worried about code making it's way in that people find acceptable because the foundation says it's good thing. The foundation could frame things in a way that makes it seem like the only choice is to accept it. People make very bad decisions when confronted with choices regarding security, anonymity, privacy as we see everyday when something is framed as supporting terrorism, or other hot topics.

Let's say next year the US government comes down hard on the foundation saying the board members will all be charged as a terrorist support group  unless they bend to their will and do this or that required of them. It's easy enough to see bitcoin transactions being someday treated as they now treat trade with Iran or NK. So the foundation (keeping this quiet) dresses this up a bit and says we need to implement such and such a change in order to ensure the continued operation of Bitcoin, for the good of Bitcoin. Yes.

The problem isn't that they can make a change that could be dropped easily enough. The problem is that they could make the change and also wield enough influence to see it acceptable to a majority of users. If faced with jail would the board members bend or resist? Most business men would make a deal that involved giving up what they least valued. I just think it's better to not even have a place where this pressure can be applied, and especially so tightly coupled to development work.

I think Satoshi did many things right to make Bitcoin resilient and step by step this has lessened. This foundation, by it's existence, seems to be willing to give up decentralization in order to more quickly realize financial gain.

[misterbigg]

Your screenshot is clearly from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/foundation.  What could you possibly have missed on that page?

As Chris Koss pointed out, the average person is going to assume that "The Bitcoin Foundation" consists of the people who are "in charge of" or "invented" Bitcoin:

non-Bitcoiners always ask, "So your company invented/operates Bitcoin?"

Only a tiny fraction of folks, the ones who are intelligent and thoughtful, are going to think "an institution financed by a donation or legacy to aid research..." The rest are going to think "So they invented/operate Bitcoin."

[kiba]

Only a tiny fraction of folks, the ones who are intelligent and thoughtful, are going to think "an institution financed by a donation or legacy to aid research..." The rest are going to think "So they invented/operate Bitcoin."

So the foundation are going to talk to people ad nauseum: "No, we didn't invent bitcoin. We just help support and promote bitcoin."

That works for me.

[kiba]

\
Unfortunately, whatever is determined to pay Gavin, the current remaining four will want the same compensation, if not more depending on the average salary standards of their respected trade. Then you have a couple other seats available, with those filling them expecting the same. And finally there's the pseudonym seat. Surely he's deserves the same wage. So let's do the math. Eight seats times a respectable salary of $50,000 USD/year equals $400,000 USD/year.

Somebody check my work.

~Bruno~

Why do you assume that they're getting compensated for filling up those seats?

[kjj]

Your screenshot is clearly from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/foundation.  What could you possibly have missed on that page?

As Chris Koss pointed out, the average person is going to assume that "The Bitcoin Foundation" consists of the people who are "in charge of" or "invented" Bitcoin:

non-Bitcoiners always ask, "So your company invented/operates Bitcoin?"

Only a tiny fraction of folks, the ones who are intelligent and thoughtful, are going to think "an institution financed by a donation or legacy to aid research..." The rest are going to think "So they invented/operate Bitcoin."

Like 6 idiots on the forums think that, maybe 10, no one else.  Do you also think that The Pediatric Cancer Foundation invented/operate giving kids cancer?

[misterbigg]

Maybe I was quick to judge without knowing the facts. Exactly what decisions will "A Bitcoin Foundation" be making, what type of public statements will they making, and what effect will they have on the Bitcoin economy and its ecosystem of users? We know that protocol decisions will follow the existing workflow (which works quite well, kudos to those involved). So what exactly will "A Bitcoin Foundation" be doing?

Like 6 idiots on the forums think that, maybe 10, no one else.  Do you also think that The Pediatric Cancer Foundation invented/operate giving kids cancer?

Okay, no one in the forum is going misunderstand "A Bitcoin Foundation" as being the inventors / maintainers of Bitcoin. I'm talking about average every day people who don't know anything about Bitcoin but might read an article in a magazine about "A Bitcoin Foundation" or see a video from one of the board members and jump to a wrong conclusion.

[kiba]

Maybe I was quick to judge without knowing the facts. Exactly what decisions will "A Bitcoin Foundation" be making, what type of public statements will they making, and what effect will they have on the Bitcoin economy and its ecosystem of users? We know that protocol decisions will follow the existing workflow (which works quite well, kudos to those involved). So what exactly will "A Bitcoin Foundation" be doing?

At the very least, pay Gavin and the developers to work on the project.

Okay, no one in the forum is going misunderstand "A Bitcoin Foundation" as being the inventors / maintainers of Bitcoin. I'm talking about average every day people who don't know anything about Bitcoin but might read an article in a magazine about "A Bitcoin Foundation" or see a video from one of the board members and jump to a wrong conclusion.

I hope one of the work the foundation will be doing is remedying errors like that.

[misterbigg]

At the very least, pay Gavin and the developers to work on the project.

This is a legitimate goal.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

OK, i had enough for today.

Good night everybody.

Me, too, and I'm still 5+ pages out. I would be finished by now, but had to stop and read the links and watch the videos and jack off to Atlas's posts. (actually, only half of them, while the other half he got a kind reach around)

I liked vess's first post, but it pissed me off when he choose to use the word cool. That said, this is a groovy thread.

Far out, all! Night!

~Bruno~

[misterbigg]

On a positive note, I think that if "A Bitcoin Foundation" is successful at funding the infrastructure completely using voluntary donations it will serve as a fantastic model to show how "the commons" can be maintained without the coercive power of the State. In this respect, I wish it success. I could be persuaded to donate if there was some recognition of the rough-shod way this was dropped onto the community.

[Syke]

Q: The Foundation is a corporation, and corporations (especially US corporations) are evil.

OK. So don't join-- go form your own non-corporate non-evil organization, or just ignore the Foundation and do whatever you think is right.

So what is the Bitcoin Foundation? Where is it incorporated? Is it a non-profit? Who owns it? Where are its bylaws?

[jgarzik]

FYI I am not from SomethingAwful, if that is your implication.

No, indeed.  You seem to be one of the sane critics ;p