Raize
Donator
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1419
Merit: 1015
|
 |
April 16, 2013, 05:32:40 PM |
|
We don't need a Bitcoin Foundation. We need a Bitcoin PAC.
Early adopters used Bitcoin for the liberty it provides. Freedom from government oversight, bureaucracy, and often outright theft.
If the government has a problem with Bitcoin, it's the government that should change, and those who claim to speak for the community should be advocating as such.
I don't care what they regulate on the fiat end, but Bitcoin is ours.
|
|
|
|
|
darkmule
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1005
|
|
April 16, 2013, 08:28:45 PM |
|
I suggest a sister poll: I can vote because I'm a Foundation member: y/n
That makes sense. Personally, I didn't vote in the poll because I don't give a fuck. I don't give a fuck about the Bitcoin Foundation, either. I've managed to use BTC over a year without knowing or caring about the membership of this entity. The only time it made a decision of importance that I noticed, it was actually a reasonably good decision (on the fork). If they had come to a staggeringly idiotic decision, I think most of the miners would have just ignored it. |
|
|
|
|
|
virtualmaster
|
|
April 16, 2013, 09:15:34 PM |
|
Anybody can regulate bitcoin but nobody should control it.
Buy bitcoins when they are cheap and sell them when they are expensive and they will be regulated.
The US government may also buy bitcoins how much they wish and so they could regulate it. Of course other governments may trade also with it. Bitcoins are for all.
If with regulation is meant control over the blockchain then this is undesirable. Any other control over the bitcoin transactions or exchanges or mining pools is also undesirable.
I think he should explain more precisely what he was meaning with regulation.
|
|
|
|
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349
Eadem mutata resurgo
|
|
April 16, 2013, 10:25:11 PM |
|
I suggest a sister poll: I can vote because I'm a Foundation member: y/n
The only time it made a decision of importance that I noticed, it was actually a reasonably good decision (on the fork). If they had come to a staggeringly idiotic decision, I think most of the miners would have just ignored it. Actually, you can read the #bitcoin-dev logs and see that the decision/suggestion to have miners go back to the 0.7.XX fork was actually made by luke-jr (and in some part sepa who backed his thinking). Gavin's first (and I think only call) was for "the longest chain wins" ... i.e. at that point that would have meant remaining on 0.8 fork and the chaos that would have ensued. tl;dr : Luke-jr (and some part sepa) made the call for the network to return to 0.7.xx fork, not Gavin or the BF. |
|
|
|
darkmule
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1005
|
|
April 17, 2013, 06:39:46 AM |
|
tl;dr : Luke-jr (and some part sepa) made the call for the network to return to 0.7.xx fork, not Gavin or the BF.
So, basically, the idea was adopted simply because it was good, and not because of some imputed authority of its proponent? That's actually a good thing. I think the concept of this thread may be mistaken. The question isn't really whether some guy should resign from some foundation, but whether we should even be making decisions based on the opinion of some foundation. Really, who cares what BCF thinks? Am I the only person practically unaware of the activities of this entity? |
|
|
|
|
|
Herodes (OP)
|
|
April 17, 2013, 09:49:37 AM |
|
tl;dr : Luke-jr (and some part sepa) made the call for the network to return to 0.7.xx fork, not Gavin or the BF.
So, basically, the idea was adopted simply because it was good, and not because of some imputed authority of its proponent? That's actually a good thing. I think the concept of this thread may be mistaken. The question isn't really whether some guy should resign from some foundation, but whether we should even be making decisions based on the opinion of some foundation. Really, who cares what BCF thinks? Am I the only person practically unaware of the activities of this entity? Agreed - while this might've been not the best thread ever created on this forum, it has spured some interesting conversation that I personally have found interesting. |
|
|
|
|
|
mobodick
|
|
April 17, 2013, 01:44:03 PM |
|
tl;dr : Luke-jr (and some part sepa) made the call for the network to return to 0.7.xx fork, not Gavin or the BF.
So, basically, the idea was adopted simply because it was good, and not because of some imputed authority of its proponent? That's actually a good thing. I think the concept of this thread may be mistaken. The question isn't really whether some guy should resign from some foundation, but whether we should even be making decisions based on the opinion of some foundation. Really, who cares what BCF thinks? Am I the only person practically unaware of the activities of this entity? Agreed - while this might've been not the best thread ever created on this forum, it has spured some interesting conversation that I personally have found interesting. In any case, you would need to make a pretty strong statement of disassociation with BCF to give it any meaning. The world will see 'Bitcoin Foundation' and think its the singular incarnation of bitcoin. They have automatically won if there are no voices against it. |
|
|
|
|
|
Herodes (OP)
|
|
April 18, 2013, 12:30:22 AM |
|
In any case, you would need to make a pretty strong statement of disassociation with BCF to give it any meaning.
Could you elaborate on this please ? |
|
|
|
|
|
mobodick
|
|
April 18, 2013, 01:29:41 AM |
|
In any case, you would need to make a pretty strong statement of disassociation with BCF to give it any meaning.
Could you elaborate on this please ? Bitcoin Foundation has an official ring to it. People will give this organisation authority purely because of its name. If your goal is to show that this organisation is not representative then you have to communicate it well enough because you're fighting an image. |
|
|
|
|
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 5250
Merit: 13092
|
|
April 18, 2013, 01:32:23 AM |
|
But true - what could we do if the official software was in fact changed containing something most people would not approve of. I hope it never comes to that..
The bitcoin.org domain name is thankfully not controlled by the Bitcoin Foundation. It's controlled by Sirius, who was given this control by Satoshi. So if a version of Bitcoin released on bitcoin.org does anything funny, Sirius can take it down. If Sirius does anything funny, the release won't be properly signed, and the Bitcoin developers could also issue a network alert. I think that this is a very nice arrangement. (And it was set up this way by Satoshi, so it must be good!) Though Gavin has said that he would like the domain name to be under the Bitcoin Foundation's control, which is something I definitely wouldn't support. I don't think that the Bitcoin Foundation does much harm if it doesn't get too much power. It might be useful for it to hold any Bitcoin trademarks and patents in jurisdictions where it's not safely possible for no one to hold such things. It's good that Gavin is getting paid. I haven't been too impressed by their other activities, though they haven't done much harm IMO. |
1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
|
|
|
|
DeeSome
|
|
April 18, 2013, 01:40:55 AM |
|
" Should Peter Vessenes resign as the Executive Director for Bitcoin Foundation ?"
Perhaps you should give it it's proper name. The Bitcoin Foundation has been voluntarily dissolved according to .gov records and the new entity is called "THE BITCOIN FOUNDATION, INC. DBA THE BITCOIN FOUNDATION"
|
|
|
|
|
Kilogram
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 10
Merit: 0
|
|
April 18, 2013, 02:08:49 AM |
|
Is it safe to say that the USD is the world's currency? Governments will need to regulate the USD side of the Bitcoin imo...thoughts?
Thx
|
|
|
|
|
|
Herodes (OP)
|
|
April 18, 2013, 03:09:01 AM |
|
I think that this is a very nice arrangement. (And it was set up this way by Satoshi, so it must be good!) Though Gavin has said that he would like the domain name to be under the Bitcoin Foundation's control, which is something I definitely wouldn't support.
Having control spread out a little, only makes sens if you ask me. " Should Peter Vessenes resign as the Executive Director for Bitcoin Foundation ?"
Perhaps you should give it it's proper name. The Bitcoin Foundation has been voluntarily dissolved according to .gov records and the new entity is called "THE BITCOIN FOUNDATION, INC. DBA THE BITCOIN FOUNDATION"
I have absolutely no knowledge about this, in general I know nothing about legal company/organization structures in the US. I obv. don't live in the US. |
|
|
|
|
|
mrkent
|
|
April 24, 2013, 06:47:30 PM |
|
If you have any supporting info regarding bitcoinfoundation's pointlessness, and how it's counter-productivity to bitcoin's ideals, please email it to info@bitcoinfoundationisanoligarchy.org |
Spend BTCBTCBTCBTCBTCBTC @ amazon
Save 10-25% with Ƀ worldwide - PurseIO | Anonymously▃▃▃▃▃▃ ⌚Fast ⚖Safe ⓑOn Credit
Buy BTC w. Card Worldwide - Purse.IO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Herodes (OP)
|
|
April 24, 2013, 07:07:04 PM |
|
They'll probably do a great job and all, but non-profit ?
There's at least 3 major business owners in the board of important people there.
|
|
|
|
|
Chakraball
Member
Offline
Activity: 81
Merit: 11
|
|
April 24, 2013, 07:50:09 PM |
|
There are some rather, quite disturbing in my opinion, facts about the foundation that have never been mentioned on this forum, indeed anywhere on the web, unless perhaps on a members only site. |
|
|
|
|
|
Herodes (OP)
|
|
April 24, 2013, 08:02:25 PM |
|
There are some rather, quite disturbing in my opinion, facts about the foundation that have never been mentioned on this forum, indeed anywhere on the web, unless perhaps on a members only site.
Could you please elaborate on what's disturbing ? |
|
|
|
|
Chakraball
Member
Offline
Activity: 81
Merit: 11
|
|
April 24, 2013, 08:50:31 PM |
|
There are some rather, quite disturbing in my opinion, facts about the foundation that have never been mentioned on this forum, indeed anywhere on the web, unless perhaps on a members only site.
Could you please elaborate on what's disturbing ? When I saw and read this thread I thought the same as your last post - "They'll probably do a great job and all, but non-profit ? There's at least 3 major business owners in the board of important people there." - So I did some searching and what I found prompted me to join the forum to comment, I will PM you shortly Herodes. |
|
|
|
|
Brushan
Member
Offline
Activity: 224
Merit: 10
|
|
April 24, 2013, 09:09:54 PM |
|
There are some rather, quite disturbing in my opinion, facts about the foundation that have never been mentioned on this forum, indeed anywhere on the web, unless perhaps on a members only site.
Could you please elaborate on what's disturbing ? When I saw and read this thread I thought the same as your last post - "They'll probably do a great job and all, but non-profit ? There's at least 3 major business owners in the board of important people there." - So I did some searching and what I found prompted me to join the forum to comment, I will PM you shortly Herodes. Why don't you tell us all? |
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
