[ANN] Bitcoin Foundation

[Come-from-Beyond]

According to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113509.0:

Do you support the launch of the Bitcoin Foundation?
Yes - 55.1% (49/89)
No - 25.8% (23/89)
Not decided yet - 19.1% (17/89)

This is a useless poll.

It can be easily manipulated by starting multiple accounts...
A proper poll mechanism should be written, which only allows individuals with proper reputation (minimum 2 months on the forum, minimum ~100 posts) to vote.

The only other option is to vote by posting posts, and later only the votes or reputable people will be counted.

Newbies unable to vote here.

[Pieter Wuille]

Nobody knows what Satoshi wanted, or what his ideas about things like a Bitcoin foundation would be.

The fact is that Gavin took Bitcoin where Satoshi couldn't, by giving it a face. I think a Bitcoin Foundation can do an even better job for that. If Satoshi would return, I'm sure his opinion would be held very highly, but Bitcoin is no longer just what Satoshi created; right now, we all help building it. If you wonder about Satoshi's intentions, don't forget that he was against alternative implementations...

EDIT: To clarify, I mean alternative fully validating nodes. Not alternative wallets in general.

[Atlas]

Nobody knows what Satoshi wanted, or what his ideas about things like a Bitcoin foundation would be.

The fact is that Gavin took Bitcoin where Satoshi couldn't, by giving it a face. I think a Bitcoin Foundation can do an even better job for that. If Satoshi would return, I'm sure his opinion would be held very highly, but Bitcoin is no longer just what Satoshi created; right now, we all help building it. If you wonder about Satoshi's intentions, don't forget that he was against alternative implementations...

No, he wasn't. He mistakenly advocated MyBitcoin.

[Atlas]

Anyways: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin

This is what Bitcoin is today. Soak it in.

As for one client of many:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoind

[The_Duke]

The fact is that Gavin took Bitcoin where Satoshi couldn't, by giving it a face.

Which many consider a bad thing...

I think a Bitcoin Foundation can do an even better job for that.

Which then would be an even worse thing.

[Pieter Wuille]

If you wonder about Satoshi's intentions, don't forget that he was against alternative implementations...

No, he wasn't. He mistakenly advocated MyBitcoin.

Which - at the time, and as far as I know - didn't use an alternative implementation.

[hazek]

Sorry, but Satoshi did appoint Gavin as his successor. I'm not sure that is even relevant, though.

It's not.

[Atlas]

If you wonder about Satoshi's intentions, don't forget that he was against alternative implementations...

No, he wasn't. He mistakenly advocated MyBitcoin.

Which - at the time, and as far as I know - didn't use an alternative implementation.

Very well. I know nothing. I concede.

[Atlas]

The fact is that Gavin took Bitcoin where Satoshi couldn't, by giving it a face.

Which many consider a bad thing...

I think a Bitcoin Foundation can do an even better job for that.

Which then would be an even worse thing.

It's bad because if the entire ecosystem becomes dependent on this face for development, marketing and other things, it will be hard to switch to a successor if the current head does poorly.

Additionally, if a higher power targets this face, it could possibly force the whole Bitcoin ecosystem to convert through influence.

I've said this before but I ought to make it clear.

[apetersson]

As to the name...  come up with a better one that (a) doesn't sound lame and (b) doesn't sound ominous to other forum denizens.

"Bitcoin Advocacy Group", "Bitcoin Supporters Group", "Bitcoin Development Group", "Bitcoin Club" are some that just came out of my mind, and I don't see these names misleading people, nor do they sound presumptuous to me. I'm sure more creative people, with some time of thinking, could definitely come out with something better.

I have to admit i like these names better, and they fit the official description better than "The Bitcoin Foundation". Since the statutes contain physical presence and meetings, and refers to state jurisdiction and the bylaws state: (a District of Columbia non-profit corporation) even a name like "Bitcoin Columbia" would be very fine.

obviously i am prejudiced because of bitcoin-austria which has similar goals (minus the funding and fancy names)

[Melbustus]

Bitcoin only exists because of Satoshi's will and hardwork. Without Satoshi, there would be no Bitcoin.

So? It's here now, no one owns it, thus the discussion should be about what's best for Bitcoin going forward. Theorizing about what one person *would've* wanted or intended is simply not relevant.

[theymos]

Well, I sincerely doubt an absolute leadership role, Linus Torvalds-style was intended. Not even Satoshi made himself appear that way.

Satoshi had absolute control over the bitcoin.org client, and he discouraged people from creating alternative clients. He tended to view the Bitcoin network as being equivalent to the Bitcoin software which he controlled. He once asked me to refrain from posting publicly about him changing a hard network rule. I have little doubt that he would have handled the P2SH issue by just quietly adding the code to the client, not waiting for miners to "agree" as Gavin did.

Not that any of this is necessarily bad, but it seems you remember Satoshi as being different than he actually was.

[kwoody]

Satoshi is female. Only an organism with a vagina can make something so beautiful.

[cbeast]

Jeez guys, you wanna start your own no-girls-invited Bitcoin club? Just grab a thesaurus and squat a domain. This is way overblown.

[Atlas]

Well, I sincerely doubt an absolute leadership role, Linus Torvalds-style was intended. Not even Satoshi made himself appear that way.

Satoshi had absolute control over the bitcoin.org client, and he discouraged people from creating alternative clients. He tended to view the Bitcoin network as being equivalent to the Bitcoin software which he controlled. He once asked me to refrain from posting publicly about him changing a hard network rule. I have little doubt that he would have handled the P2SH issue by just quietly adding the code to the client, not waiting for miners to "agree" as Gavin did.

Not that any of this is necessarily bad, but it seems you remember Satoshi as being different than he actually was.

Indeed. I apologize.

[apetersson]

It is moot to speculate on a good naming since the decision is already made, but here are some more name ideas in case someone wants to set up another bitcoin organisation and to get them out of my head i have to write them down.

sorted by seriousness:

Bitcoin benefactors
Bitbenefactory
Bitcoin union
Bitcoin confraternity
Coinfraternity
Bitcoin syndicate
Bitcoin union
Bitcoin workshop
Bitcoin collective
Bitcoin consortium (maybe same semantic problems as foundation)
Bitcoin association (same..)
Bitcoin pool (well, not a mining pool)
Bitcoin endowment
Bitcoin amalgamation/conglutination (ok... its getting ridiculous)

what is aparently bothering a very vocal minority is the word "The" in the name. Simply "Bitcoin Foundation" would sound much more humble and innocent.

That said, i think its really great to see some seriousness in the Bitcoin world, which is really needed. Also having a solid model for funding the development is needed and will enable long-term prosperity for the whole industry. I could criticize some minor details about the genesis of this organisation but i leave that to others who apparently like to spend a lot of time in this thread

[boonies4u]

It is moot to speculate on a good naming since the decision is already made, but here are some more name ideas in case someone wants to set up another bitcoin organisation and to get them out of my head i have to write them down.

sorted by seriousness:

Bitcoin benefactors
Bitbenefactory
Bitcoin union
Bitcoin confraternity
Coinfraternity
Bitcoin syndicate
Bitcoin union
Bitcoin workshop
Bitcoin collective
Bitcoin consortium (maybe same semantic problems as foundation)
Bitcoin association (same..)
Bitcoin pool (well, not a mining pool)
Bitcoin endowment
Bitcoin amalgamation/conglutination (ok... its getting ridiculous)

what is aparently bothering a very vocal minority is the word "The" in the name. Simply "Bitcoin Foundation" would sound much more humble and innocent.

That said, i think its really great to see some seriousness in the Bitcoin world, which is really needed. Also having a solid model for funding the development is needed and will enable long-term prosperity for the whole industry. I could criticize some minor details about the genesis of this organisation but i leave that to others who apparently like to spend a lot of time in this thread

You said bitcoin union twice.

[Atlas]

The Andresen Foundation for Bitcoin Development

[Yankee (BitInstant)]

The Andresen Foundation for Bitcoin Development

I kinda like this one, lol seriously!

[hazek]

The Andresen Foundation for Bitcoin Development

I kinda like this one, lol seriously!

Yeah me too.