jgarzik goes berzerk in #bitcoin-dev, wtf?

[MoonShadow]

Where are you getting that idea from? The lead dev is working on new features with forum members in a thread here atm as usual.

His complaint is that the devs aren't listening to what he considers to be important.  And it wouldn't matter if they listened to no one, the source is open, anyone with the skils can do anything with it.

[QuestionAuthority]

Where are you getting that idea from? The lead dev is working on new features with forum members in a thread here atm as usual.

As long as they are acceptable ideas I’m sure that’s true. That’s the same way freedom in the USA works. Everyone is free to contribute as long as it’s the type of contribution that’s acceptable.

EDIT: They stopped the conversation with a ban.

[CharlesPonzi]

Sounds to me like getting someone to go in the main dev channel and getting one of the main devs to agree to break the iran blockade would be a fairly easy way to perform an economic hitman operation on bitcoin.

besides no one is stopping you from developing an "iran bitcoin" client.

[MoonShadow]

Where are you getting that idea from? The lead dev is working on new features with forum members in a thread here atm as usual.

As long as they are acceptable ideas I’m sure that’s true. That’s the same way freedom in the USA works. Everyone is free to contribute as long as it’s the type of contribution that’s acceptable.

EDIT: They stopped the conversation with a ban.

Maybe they concluded you just weren't going to take no for an answer.  Are you sure that it was a conversation?

[niko]

Alright, obviously many people feel strongly about this issue. Few pages pages back I explained why I do. After reading some of the responses, most prominently thoughtfan's, I have to admit that my reaction has got not much to do with Bitcoin development. I still feel that Jeff lost most of my respect because he sounded as if he was supportive of trade sanctions, that is all. I don't think this puts Bitcoin development in any imminent danger, though. To those who patiently engaged in honest discussion: thank you.
Over and out.

[repentance]

Which is antithetical to the purpose of bitcoin technology in the first place. The idea that no government can control what people do with their money.

The role of the devs is to ensure that Bitcoin technology is still around by the time the majority of BTC have been mined.  The devs cannot control the purposes for which people use that technology, but the technology itself needs to survive long-term in order for the Bitcoin Project to be anything other than another failed libertarian experiment.  

The devs have already said in the past that they don't even want Bitcoin to go mainstream at this point - which makes sense if you're looking at this as a project which will take 40 years to mature, as they are.  While they can't stop people from trying to mainstream Bitcoin, changes to the client for that specific purpose are incredibly low on their list of priorities.

That the devs might believe that politicising Bitcoin by promoting its use to bypass sanctions would jeopardise the long-term future of Bitcoin itself doesn't mean everyone else has to believe the same.  Conversely, it's not reasonable to expect them to actively take action which they believe will put the project in jeopardy.  They can't stop others from doing it, but nobody - the devs included - has a moral obligation to do things which they believe will threaten the future of Bitcoin.

The devs aren't wish-granting genies.  Everyone is free to develop whatever features they want or to hire someone else to develop those features. By demanding that the devs be responsible for developing every single thing on people's wishlists, you're actually centralising Bitcoin.

How do those of you who believe that the devs should be leading the anarchistic charge feel about the fact that Satoshi himself has chosen not to do so?  Is he - too - "doing Bitcoin wrong" and being "treasonous" by dropping out of public view?

[kiba]

Which is antithetical to the purpose of bitcoin technology in the first place. The idea that no government can control what people do with their money.

Bitcoin doesn't give a damn about your revolution, or your anarcho-capitalism, or your political idealogy or your <sacred principles>.

People do.

[jgarzik]

Alright, obviously many people feel strongly about this issue. Few pages pages back I explained why I do. After reading some of the responses, most prominently thoughtfan's, I have to admit that my reaction has got not much to do with Bitcoin development. I still feel that Jeff lost most of my respect because he sounded as if he was supportive of trade sanctions, that is all. I don't think this puts Bitcoin development in any imminent danger, though. To those who patiently engaged in honest discussion: thank you.

Well, there is greater respect for you now, after having said this.  Maybe that is why you lack a highlighted "ignore" word in your profile, unlike several trolls in this thread.  (protip:  use that 'ignore' button liberally on this forum; people are marked thusly for very good reasons)

In point of fact, in this thread or in the quoted IRC conversation, I never endorsed or condemned any US government policies.  Foreign policy always makes for a lively debate, though quite off-topic, and I am very well versed in the positive and negative impact from a great many foreign policy choices of governments around the world.

For the immediate reaction (temporary IRC ban), the explanation was simple:  it was off-topic, potentially inflammatory crap we specifically do not want in #bitcoin-dev.  People occasionally attempt to get on IRC and try to troll the devs into saying something publicly that fits their agenda.  After repeated warnings... boot.

The bigger picture is simple too:  You don't tug on Superman's cape.  With today's young and very experimental bitcoin software, if you wanted to try really hard, and pick the worst thing to do to Bitcoin, it would be to try and get bitcoin involved in Iran money laundering, North Korea money laundering, Taliban or jihadi terrorist funding.

That is just a simple, pragmatic statement that saying nothing about one's personal feelings about a particular government policy.

Doing those things is not just stupid, it's fucking stupid.  Doing any of those things is working towards bitcoin's failure.

[BkkCoins]

The bigger picture is simple too:  You don't tug on Superman's cape.  With today's young and very experimental bitcoin software, if you wanted to try really hard, and pick the worst thing to do to Bitcoin, it would be to try and get bitcoin involved in Iran money laundering, North Korea money laundering, Taliban or jihadi terrorist funding.

This is probably true but also probably irrelevant. If the US government says Bitcoin is involved in these things then it won't matter whether it actually is or not. They will act as if it is, and through repeated statements ensure people come to believe that it is. And if that doesn't take hold then they'll have a covert operation that makes it true.

The best defense would be to do whatever is possible to make it not matter. To me that means really push hard for localized, distributed exchange like localbitcoin.com and not centralized exchanges where most of the money is going now. Perhaps a Tor hidden service that does what that site does. Even still I can't see that working entirely. Bitcoins secret weapon is slow and continual conversion of mindshare.

I'd love to see an easy web interface to bitcoin-otc. That must be possible but I've not heard of anyone doing that. I don't mean another localbitcoins but an interface that handles the gpg mechanics, the signatures, authentication, and provides a nice trade history, and interface for trading that even total newbies could use without crypto-knowledge. It would be a web front end to the freenode channel for people who never use these things.

[repentance]

Which is antithetical to the purpose of bitcoin technology in the first place. The idea that no government can control what people do with their money.

Bitcoin doesn't give a damn about your revolution, or your anarcho-capitalism, or your political idealogy or your <sacred principles>.

People do.

You quoted the wrong person.  It wasn't me who said that, it was LightRider.  I've consistently said that Bitcoin is simply a protocol which people can use as they see fit.  There's nothing stopping anarchists using it to further their ideology but they have no right to demand that others do the same or adapt it for that purpose any more than people who are in Bitcoin purely for the money have the right to demand that others use it for purely commercial purposes.  It's a tool and that's all it is.

[LightRider]

For the immediate reaction (temporary IRC ban), the explanation was simple:  it was off-topic, potentially inflammatory crap we specifically do not want in #bitcoin-dev.  People occasionally attempt to get on IRC and try to troll the devs into saying something publicly that fits their agenda.  After repeated warnings... boot.

No one was trying to get you to say anything. You inserted yourself into the conversation, from what the logs indicate. How was this person trolling when pursuing relevant discussion without asking you for any involvement or statement at all?

[becoin]

With today's young and very experimental bitcoin software, if you wanted to try really hard, and pick the worst thing to do to Bitcoin, it would be to try and get bitcoin involved in Iran money laundering, North Korea money laundering, Taliban or jihadi terrorist funding.

But you can't prevent it either, so your explanation doesn't make sense. It's an OSS and everyone can use it as they wish. Including US and UK government agencies currently laundering money for the terrorists in Syria as they did it before with the terrorists in Libya.

My point is, be responsible as a bitcoin coredev and don't demonstrate your political preferences in such a rude manner when other people in the dev channel are just doing their regular job i.e. asking for help to translate bitcoin client to different languages! If I could I'd have banned you from the coredev group.

[memvola]

Doing those things is not just stupid, it's fucking stupid.  Doing any of those things is working towards bitcoin's failure.

If what you say is true, and it may very well be, there is no hope to begin with.

What I want to believe is, they either are allowing it to happen (maybe they think it will empower the "free world"), or they know they can't stop it (or they know it will fail anyway). I fail to see "they can't grasp what this technology makes possible" as a possibility, sorry. I know the system is very complex, but still.

I think "keeping the dev team and the foundation out of unnecessary headaches" is a good enough defense of how issues like this will be handled. It's also understandable to want trouble later than now. But it's harder to argue for the "long term strategic plan" thing. Very moot. And that rhetoric by itself can get you in trouble because it has a "hidden motive" vibe to it.

Anyway, the solution to all our problems is more users and more developers, more homogenously distributed around the world, and we should all work on that. Let #bitcoin-dev-iran kick out illegal U.S. supporters, if this is how it can only be balanced.

[greyhawk]

Ignoring someone of forum is modern form of sending him or her to Gulag, and clear example of what this movement and key persons are about.

If Solzhenitsyn could read this he wouldn't know whether to laugh or to cry.

[davout]

Ignoring someone of forum is modern form of sending him or her to Gulag, and clear example of what this movement and key persons are about.

If Solzhenitsyn could read this he wouldn't know whether to laugh or to cry.

if shrödinger could read this he would be in a superposition of laughing and crying states
other than that I think this ban was/is retarded

[Technomage]

It's not that serious guys. The key issue here is do the devs oppose making a Farsi version of Bitcoin-Qt, or are they okay with it. As far as I know, they are not opposing that. Everything else here is actually not that relevant. As long as they don't start actively doing radical shit like that, I think we're still OK.

I would like to add that I have nothing to contribute regarding the Farsi version but I'd be glad to see it. Just like I would be glad to see any other language version. Bitcoin is non-political, remember that.

[memvola]

You might be impressed with their coding skills or whatever, but their actions reveal they are just ordinary scared and corruptable humans, which is serious disadvantage when it comes to world-changing project.

I'm not impressed with their coding skills, I'm impressed by their commitment. This also covers service providers like BitInstant and even casascius, because even though they have a lot to gain, at this point they are risking a lot as well.

If you really think that manufactured consent is possible and damaging, you can easily polarize development. It's hard, but not impossible to become the maintainer of the de facto standard codebase. However you don't need to even come close to that, just be a decent competitor and that would considerably lessen the disadvantage you are talking about because of the diversified interests. If you think it's what ought to be done, it is your/our responsibility. For a project like Bitcoin, it really shouldn't matter whether devs are corrupt (not sure what that means). If you think they are, and they can indeed manufacture consent, I don't know what you think complaining about that here would accomplish.

[Technomage]

@ Technomage - The situation is as serious as it can be. It is too bad you are so easily lulled and convinced to drop your guard.

I'm not dropping my guard. In fact I'm more vigilant than ever thanks to this incident. I'm backing off though, but just for the time being.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

@ Technomage - The situation is as serious as it can be. It is too bad you are so easily lulled and convinced to drop your guard.

I'm not dropping my guard. In fact I'm more vigilant than ever thanks to this incident. I'm backing off though, but just for the time being.

Oh come on.

This forum is almost 95% full of paranoid people (No offense - I do realize that I myself am quite paranoid). The devs cannot even lift a finger without somebody on the forum saying "one of the devs lifted a finger" ! OMG they betrayed us !!!!!!!11111oneoneone.

So if you want to find vigilant people, this is probably the best forum for that in the universe.

[greyhawk]

This forum is almost 95% full of paranoid people (No offense - I do realize that I myself am quite paranoid). The devs cannot even lift a finger without somebody on the forum saying "one of the devs lifted a finger" ! OMG they betrayed us !!!!!!!11111oneoneone.

This.

Imagine being a developer and you have this great idea on... oh, how about pruning the blockchain. So you discuss it with your co-developers and everyone agrees that yeah, that would be a great thing. So you announce your plans on the forums....

..... and all hell breaks loose. "THOU ART VIOLATING THE TENETS OF OUR GOOD LORD SATOSHI, PRAISED BE HIS NAME! THOU SHALT BE PUT UPON THE WALL TO RECEIVE THE BLESSING OF COLD METAL ROUNDS! LET THIS BE A LESSON TO ALL HERETICS! DO NOT CHANGE THE WORD OF THE HOLY PAPER LEST YE BE CHANGED TO BREATHE NO MORE!"