Is one of the devs (Luke-Jr) an enemy of Bitcoin ?

[hazek]

Personally I don't care about Luke as far as his beliefs go. As long as people check his work, and I have no doubt all dev's work is checked not just Luke's, I don't mind what he wants if he leaves me alone.

Maybe all the developers should operate under a pseudonym and submit things from behind TOR, so that they're all treated equally? This is why I don't like Libertarianism -- the lack of rules/etiquette/laws (depending on scale) creates a tendency towards name-calling/lynch-mobbing/civil war (depending on scale). If "freedom of opinion" is only permitted to the extent that the crowd (or the most pissed off crowd-pleaser) will allow, then f*k that. Gimme some laws that protect my unpopular Queer/Asian/Polyamorist/Neo-Feudal/whatever beliefs from the tyranny of the majority.

I actually think this could be beneficial since I imagine it would bring about more wariness and scrutiny which I think is exactly what we want with new code.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Is one of the devs (Luke-Jr) an enemy of Bitcoin ?

I'm 99% sure he is something between a tech-savvy kid and an autist. His social skills are too low, so his deeds look strange to the others. I doubt he is an enemy of Bitcoin, coz he used to attack altcurrencies. Not sure he did it to defend Bitcoin, maybe it was just an expression of his personality, but anyway...

If I were you I would just ignore him. Autists are the best programmers, so while he writes a code for Bitcoin we should be patient.

[MysteryMiner]

Is one of the devs (Luke-Jr) an enemy of Bitcoin ?

I'm 99% sure he is something between a tech-savvy kid and an autist. His social skills are too low, so his deeds look strange to the others. I doubt he is an enemy of Bitcoin, coz he used to attack altcurrencies. Not sure he did it to defend Bitcoin, maybe it was just an expression of his personality, but anyway...

If I were you I would just ignore him. Autists are the best programmers, so while he writes a code for Bitcoin we should be patient.

Dont mix up autists and aspergers. They are similar, but most often social awkwardness and extraordinary computer skills are aspergers.

[finway]

No, though he's hard to be persuaded.

[Raoul Duke]

So, people who don't share your vision of Bitcoin are enemies of Bitcoin?

I think you need a better argument than that one, honestly.

[axus]

Double-checking commits is good practice for every developer.  I know they'd be thrilled if someone was double-checking their work and pointing out flaws.

Luke-Jr might not share the ideals of Bitcoin spirit but he is good at coding. Even if Luke-Jr is wrong socially, his code adheres to laws of math and computing, so he cannot break these laws easily without anyone noticing. Double check his commits and Bitcoin are safe for now.

The OP is right in most accounts. I don't agree with most of libertarian views, but I'm hardcore unregulated internet freedom and anti-censorship activist. So making Bitcoin into regulated currency is completely unacceptable.

[Monster Tent]

Anyone who sticks bible sayings in the block headers from their pool isn't exactly right in  the head.

[Insu Dra]

Déjà vu:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=62037.0

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

Déjà vu:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=62037.0

Sweet Jesus...

I knew that there is something seriously wrong with this guy.

[SimonL]

Déjà vu:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=62037.0

Sweet Jesus...

I knew that there is something seriously wrong with this guy.

For better or worse, he has also outright attacked other alt-chains. http://bitcoinmedia.com/luke-dashjr-throws-book-at-solidcoin/

I also recall he destroyed another alt-chain coiled coin using his Eligius mining pool to 51% it and effectively undermine the trust of said chain. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56675.0

Whether these were smart decisions or not, Luke AFAIK has only acted in his best interests, (luckily they have also coincided with Bitcoins interests). BIP16/17 also demonstrated he is perfectly willing to undermine the leadership of Bitcoin's developer group to pursue his own agenda.

I don't personally hate the guy, he has added considerable expertise and support to Bitcoin over the years, but it is obvious he is a man that flies under his own flag. Just be aware of his past before you guys start picking sides.

[memvola]

If you are enemy of Libertarianism, the you are an enemy of Bitcoin as well.

NO!

I'm quite possibly a libertarian. At least I am so in the general sense of the word and not the American one. However, I think your assertion by itself is harmful to Bitcoin as a movement. Maybe you are the enemy of Bitcoin in this sense, no?

I'm joking of course, but I hope you are also joking...

People are always the weakest link in chain and that is the reason Bitcoin exists: to route around human imperfections.

Bitcoin depends on social phenomena. It doesn't depend on "mathematics" in the correct sense of the word. You trust that the majority of people involved in Bitcoin will want it to work. It's a very wise thing to do, but that wisdom comes from the society as an organism, not something independent of that. I'm not suggesting to label Bitcoin with some loaded term like "democratic", but it is what it is.

Although I think it doesn't make much sense (i.e. what the hell is "perfect"?), I can guess what you mean by human imperfections. Bitcoin doesn't route around that, but you could say that it uses some conventional methods to dampen it.

Déjà vu:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=62037.0

Sweet Jesus...

I knew that there is something seriously wrong with this guy.

Let's not extend the phrase "poisonous people" out of the context of open source development. Most capable programmers have obsessive personalities. I imagine a lot of us can become poisonous in that sense in different situations, I know I have been a lot of times.

it is obvious he is a man that flies under his own flag

Wasn't that the only way of being a libertarian?

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

If you are enemy of Libertarianism, the you are an enemy of Bitcoin as well.

NO!

I'm quite possibly a libertarian. At least I am so in the general sense of the word and not the American one. However, I think your assertion by itself is harmful to Bitcoin as a movement. Maybe you are the enemy of Bitcoin in this sense, no?

Error: This sentence contains no actual argument.
I cannot work with that, please elaborate.

I'm joking of course, but I hope you are also joking...

Nope. I am dead serious.
If you are an enemy of libertarian principles, then you HAVE to be an enemy of Bitcoin, whether you realize it or not. It is simple logic:

Bitcoin itself is much more hardcore than Libertarianism (closer to anarchy), so if one doesn't agree with libertarian principles, one also cannot agree with anarchy/crypto-anarchy principles, so it is logically impossible for that person to agree with what Bitcoin stands for. Unless the one doesn't undserstand logic.

[memvola]

I think your assertion by itself is harmful to Bitcoin as a movement

Error: This sentence contains no actual argument.
I cannot work with that, please elaborate.

I thought it was a well known argument, almost as old as this forum. Not all Bitcoin users are libertarians, and neither all the people who contributed to the project. We also don't want it to be confined to libertarians. The statement of "If you are enemy of Libertarianism, the you are an enemy of Bitcoin as well" does not reflect well on Bitcoin's image. I know very decent people who like the idea of Bitcoin who can also be viewed as enemies of Libertarianism as much as Luke-Jr. Is there any benefit to antagonizing them?

If you are an enemy of libertarian principles, then you HAVE to be an enemy of Bitcoin, whether you realize it or not. It is simple logic:

Bitcoin itself is much more hardcore than Libertarianism (closer to anarchy), so if one doesn't agree with libertarian principles, one also cannot agree with anarchy/crypto-anarchy principles, so it is logically impossible for that person to agree with what Bitcoin stands for. Unless the one doesn't undserstand logic.

I agree that all structures have a normative aspect. However I can't see what kind of system you have used to derive the norms from the structure itself. It's hard to defend the idea of a normative nature without committing a naturalistic fallacy.

From a naive point of view, Bitcoin doesn't "stand for" anything. It's a tool. You are relating it to libertarianism because of what the tool may be used for. But if you think there is a bidirectional connection, the burden is on you to prove that. By "simple logic", you have to show that Bitcoin as a whole is and can only be anarchic. It is quite hard to argue for an impossibility.

Maybe you are relating it to libertarianism because you imagine that it is created FOR something. So, if there is such an a priori norm, even the failure of the structure itself from upholding it could be irrelevant. But how did you get access to such information? And how is it binding?

[mobodick]

Déjà vu:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=62037.0

Sweet Jesus...

I knew that there is something seriously wrong with this guy.

For better or worse, he has also outright attacked other alt-chains. http://bitcoinmedia.com/luke-dashjr-throws-book-at-solidcoin/

If the people from solidcoin indeed stripped away the MIT licence from the sourcecode than a DMCA is the least this community should do to ensure the future of this type of cryptocurreny.
Luke did the only right thing in this case and this community should have ejected the people from solidcoin for biting the hand that fed them.

[mobodick]

If you are enemy of Libertarianism, the you are an enemy of Bitcoin as well.

NO!

I'm quite possibly a libertarian. At least I am so in the general sense of the word and not the American one. However, I think your assertion by itself is harmful to Bitcoin as a movement. Maybe you are the enemy of Bitcoin in this sense, no?

Error: This sentence contains no actual argument.
I cannot work with that, please elaborate.

I'm joking of course, but I hope you are also joking...

Nope. I am dead serious.
If you are an enemy of libertarian principles, then you HAVE to be an enemy of Bitcoin, whether you realize it or not. It is simple logic:

Bitcoin itself is much more hardcore than Libertarianism (closer to anarchy), so if one doesn't agree with libertarian principles, one also cannot agree with anarchy/crypto-anarchy principles, so it is logically impossible for that person to agree with what Bitcoin stands for. Unless the one doesn't undserstand logic.

I think you are seriously confusing ideals with an actual working implementation of a cryptocurrency.
The implementation can be perfectly viable in society even if it fails to live up to the expectations of an ideal.
Bitcoin is just an informational tool.
If you think that bitcoin is somehow magically anarcho anything then you are wrong.
Bitcoin cannot (now and in the forseeable future) operate without the centralized economies we have now.
Strip away all things that are produced by or paid for by the fiat economy and bitcoin is nothing.
No computers, no internet, no radio, no science, no modern world to think up anarchistical ideals in to bring down the society that created this free time for you to think.
You are eating your own tail, but you haven't noticed yet.

Bitcoin is firmly rooted in our modern (centralized) society.
It is fully defined in terms of centralized society and cannot exist without it.

[mobodick]

...
Nope. I am dead serious.
If you are an enemy of libertarian principles, then you HAVE to be an enemy of Bitcoin, whether you realize it or not. It is simple logic:

Bitcoin itself is much more hardcore than Libertarianism (closer to anarchy), so if one doesn't agree with libertarian principles, one also cannot agree with anarchy/crypto-anarchy principles, so it is logically impossible for that person to agree with what Bitcoin stands for. Unless the one doesn't undserstand logic.

You're alienating Bitcoin users with your political tripe. As far as I'm concerned, Libertarianism is naive fringe bullshit, and they are trying to score a free ride on the back of Bitcoin's general cleverness. By being such evangelists, some Libertarians are holding Bitcoin back.

Incidentally, is no-one familiar with the concept of Group think?!

It's disappointing.

Fortunately the people shouting words like "anarchy/crypto-anarchy principles" usually don't make enough with their paper rounds to really make a difference..

[Phinnaeus Gage]

I voted 'I don't know' just to see the stats. Amazing!

I don't think so, because he wears an orange shirt when he speaks at public functions. 

[Parazyd]

I'm just waiting for you to accuse him because of the fork

[Phinnaeus Gage]

From what I've seen of Josh Blue LukeJr on stage, I don't think he should be in procession of sharp objects.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

From what I've seen of Josh Blue LukeJr on stage, I don't think he should be in procession of sharp objects.

Link to video please ?