Interviewing Bitcoin Foundation Ex. Director Jon Matonis - Any Questions?

[mindtomatter]

Hi Everybody,
we're going to be recording an interview with the Bitcoin Foundations new executive director on Let's Talk Bitcoin!.

I'll be asking about the agenda under the Matonis administration, what the focus will be, things like that.

Are there any specific questions you'd like asked of our new director?  Please post them here.

[justusranvier]

What ever happened to the address tainting proposal? Is this something the Foundation is going to support?

[mindtomatter]

Was there ever an official proposal?  I thought it was just hypotheticals

[justusranvier]

Either was it would be good to hear an official position.

[cypherdoc]

did being targeted by LukeJr, gmaxwell, jgarzik, and Savann play a role in your decision?

[marcus_of_augustus]

How many coins you got? 

As a percentage of assets does he have none, some or "all-in" ?

[Melbustus]

I'd like to hear Matonis say that the Foundation is committed to fighting to uphold bitcoin's ideal monetary properties. Specifically, fungibility.

[mindtomatter]

I'd like to hear Matonis say that the Foundation is committed to fighting to uphold bitcoin's ideal monetary properties. Specifically, fungibility.

Can you explain this a little?

[QuestionAuthority]

I'd like to hear Matonis say that the Foundation is committed to fighting to uphold bitcoin's ideal monetary properties. Specifically, fungibility.

Can you explain this a little?

Is he going to support the address tainting proposal? Bitcoins are not fungible and effectively worthless if he supports it.

[halfawake]

This episode I'm definitely going to have to listen to.  What I'd like to hear: what kind of advocacy is the Bitcoin Foundation doing in Washington DC for the Bitcoin Community?

[Melbustus]

I'd like to hear Matonis say that the Foundation is committed to fighting to uphold bitcoin's ideal monetary properties. Specifically, fungibility.

Can you explain this a little?

Yes, as someone else noted above, this pertains to taint. I'm curious whether the Foundation will support efforts to build databases of "tainted" (ie, banned/blacklisted) coins that entities can use to block transactions. I believe such systems run the risk of destroying an *essential* property of ideal money; ie, fungibility - the notion that one unit of the currency is the same as another, and can be sliced, recombined, and spent without issue.

Peter Vessenes was very pro-taint-database at the conference in May. I don't know if he was speaking on behalf of CoinLab, the Foundation, just himself, or some combo thereof, but his position was clear. I'd be interested to hear what Jon Matonis has to say about the issue in his new role as Executive Director of the Foundation.

To be clear, I'm all for bitcoin businesses fully operating within the bounds of the law. Fully open and compliant businesses will elevate bitcoin in the public sphere and get the currency into more hands. That's great for bitcoin.

What's not great for bitcoin is harming a core property of what makes it a fascinating and unique experiment. Bitcoin is ideal money for modern times, and fungibility has been a key property of good media of exchange for thousands of years. If that's eliminated or weakened, the case for bitcoin as a great money is eliminated or weakened, and this whole thing becomes a lot less interesting.

[Peter Todd]

You guys may find the responses from the foundation board members to this pull-request to add the promotion of decentralization and privacy to the foundation Bylaws to be interesting:  https://github.com/pmlaw/The-Bitcoin-Foundation-Legal-Repo/pull/4

[lonestranger]

I would like to know how Matonis plans to appease the forces that want to "regulate" (control, neuter) bitcoin while at the same time protecting those aspects that make bitcoin extraordinary.

Also, since the Foundation appears to have attracted people with statist, regulatory inclinations what does it say about the organization that it has now installed him as its director?

Also, given that there are many prominent people in the bitcoin community that are pro-regulation as well as very many who are rabidly anti-regulation what future paths does he see?  No problem it will take care of itself?  Blockchain fork?  New darkhorse technology like zerocoin?

[PrintMule]

His general opinion on altcoins?

[LiteCoinGuy]

His general opinion on altcoins?

especially Litecoin 

[aigeezer]

Also, since the Foundation appears to have attracted people with statist, regulatory inclinations what does it say about the organization that it has now installed him as its director?

Yes, more on this please. How did the "new broom" move come about? Did Vessenes wake up one morning thinking Matonis could do a better job? Was there a coup - if so, how did it work and when is the next one?... Seriously - the sudden apparent top-down change in direction came as quite a surprise to many - how did it happen? Is it a "good thing" in terms of structure and process (not outcome)? - if so, why? Will Matonis be hiring a food taster?       

[malevolent]

I would like to know how Matonis plans to appease the forces that want to "regulate" (control, neuter) bitcoin while at the same time protecting those aspects that make bitcoin extraordinary.
Also, since the Foundation appears to have attracted people with statist, regulatory inclinations what does it say about the organization that it has now installed him as its director?
Also, given that there are many prominent people in the bitcoin community that are pro-regulation as well as very many who are rabidly anti-regulation what future paths does he see?  No problem it will take care of itself?  Blockchain fork?  New darkhorse technology like zerocoin?

+1
The crony capitalist crowd is a huge issue.

I am not 100% up-to-date on what's going on in the Bitcoin Foundation but I would like to hear Jon Matonis elaborate on this:

The Bitcoin Foundation itself is in a difficult position: we all know who it's funded by, and everyone involved is publicly known. This can be a problem: in the last round of grant proposals at one point Gavin suggested someone submit a grant for a trust-free mixer service to help people make the coins in their wallet more anonymous by mixing them with a large pool of other users. I asked Gavin about that later, and he said the foundation lawyers nixed the idea because efforts to make Bitcoin users more anonymous could be seen to be aiding money laundering, especially if the foundation itself was paying for development and to run the servers.

I believe the Foundation should learn from the TOR Project:
https://www.torproject.org/docs/faq-abuse.html.en

[cypherdoc]

I'd like to hear Matonis say that the Foundation is committed to fighting to uphold bitcoin's ideal monetary properties. Specifically, fungibility.

Can you explain this a little?

Yes, as someone else noted above, this pertains to taint. I'm curious whether the Foundation will support efforts to build databases of "tainted" (ie, banned/blacklisted) coins that entities can use to block transactions. I believe such systems run the risk of destroying an *essential* property of ideal money; ie, fungibility - the notion that one unit of the currency is the same as another, and can be sliced, recombined, and spent without issue.

Peter Vessenes was very pro-taint-database at the conference in May. I don't know if he was speaking on behalf of CoinLab, the Foundation, just himself, or some combo thereof, but his position was clear. I'd be interested to hear what Jon Matonis has to say about the issue in his new role as Executive Director of the Foundation.

To be clear, I'm all for bitcoin businesses fully operating within the bounds of the law. Fully open and compliant businesses will elevate bitcoin in the public sphere and get the currency into more hands. That's great for bitcoin.

What's not great for bitcoin is harming a core property of what makes it a fascinating and unique experiment. Bitcoin is ideal money for modern times, and fungibility has been a key property of good media of exchange for thousands of years. If that's eliminated or weakened, the case for bitcoin as a great money is eliminated or weakened, and this whole thing becomes a lot less interesting.

well said and i concur wholeheartedly.

[matonis]

I'd like to hear Matonis say that the Foundation is committed to fighting to uphold bitcoin's ideal monetary properties. Specifically, fungibility.

Consider it done. I fully support bitcoin fungibility across the board without exception.

[cypherdoc]

I'd like to hear Matonis say that the Foundation is committed to fighting to uphold bitcoin's ideal monetary properties. Specifically, fungibility.

Consider it done. I fully support bitcoin fungibility across the board without exception.

now that is helpful!  thank you!