Should the Bitcoin client have a donate button?

[AlexWaters]

Gavin has mentioned adding a donate button to the Bitcoin client. I think this is a great idea.

My understanding is that Bitcoin is a decentralized P2P network, and we want to keep with the decentralized spirit. Please bear in mind that we have infrastructure needs, and if met we could deliver a better user experience.

Similar to BitTorrent.org, I think that Bitcoin needs some funding to help build out that necessary infrastructure. In my opinion, adding a donate button would be a step in the right direction.


If the developers were to add a donate button, where would those donations go?

Gavin has also mentioned (http://bit.ly/sbbHzf) setting up a NFP. Does anyone have experience doing this? If so, can you post some resources?

I created this Google doc to brainstorm the promotion of a 'fund Bitcoin campaign': http://bit.ly/tHZr53

Please feel free to comment on the Google doc.

[1714158233]

1714158233

[1714158233]

1714158233

[1714158233]

1714158233

[1714158233]

1714158233

[neptop]

Sounds like a solid idea. A Bitcoin Foundation for developing and promoting Bitcoin maybe funding projects. I always liked how the Perl Foundation did this, but you can take any other example, be it Mozilla or whatever. I think NLnet would also fund Bitcoin. They support lots of projects that are similar to Bitcoin.

I am not sure whether a video is really needed. I think it's much better to have Bitcoin mentioned in a lot of places instead of putting up one big video and then people don't like it or only people who know Bitcoin are going to watch it.

You could only care for press and media in general. Maybe someone from outside creates a documentary or reportage about Bitcoin.

[btc_artist]

Watching

[zellfaze]

If the Bitcoin project is going to have a donation address at all I think it needs to be implemented as described in this topic (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=53177.0).  The system that they work out in that topic requires two separate parties to generate private keys that are then matemagically turned into a single private key that neither of them know.  Then they matemagically make a public key of that by doing some crazy math with the separate public keys.

Anyhow, boils down to multiple parties having to corroborate in order to spend the money.  Either that or https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0011 needs implemented.

I just don't trust one person having control of an address that is listed to be donated to on every copy of the Satoshi client.  I'm all for the idea of having a donate button, but trust comes up as a big issue if we add one.

[btc_artist]

If the Bitcoin project is going to have a donation address at all I think it needs to be implemented as described in this topic (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=53177.0).  The system that they work out in that topic requires two separate parties to generate private keys that are then matemagically turned into a single private key that neither of them know.  Then they matemagically make a public key of that by doing some crazy math with the separate public keys.

Anyhow, boils down to multiple parties having to corroborate in order to spend the money.  Either that or https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0011 needs implemented.

I just don't trust one person having control of an address that is listed to be donated to on every copy of the Satoshi client.  I'm all for the idea of having a donate button, but trust comes up as a big issue if we add one.

This is a fair concern, and I like the idea of spreading the trust among 2 or 3 people who would have to be in agreement to redeem the BTC.

[jothan]

If the Bitcoin project is going to have a donation address at all I think it needs to be implemented as described in this topic (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=53177.0).  The system that they work out in that topic requires two separate parties to generate private keys that are then matemagically turned into a single private key that neither of them know.  Then they matemagically make a public key of that by doing some crazy math with the separate public keys.

Anyhow, boils down to multiple parties having to corroborate in order to spend the money.  Either that or https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0011 needs implemented.

I just don't trust one person having control of an address that is listed to be donated to on every copy of the Satoshi client.  I'm all for the idea of having a donate button, but trust comes up as a big issue if we add one.

BIP_0011 would probably be better since it would not require trust between the users. With the proposed scheme, the private key has to be computed at least once by combining secrets. Having the block chain and the nodes arbitrate this would be much less risky and would not require extra trust.

[theymos]

I voted no because a button is way too obtrusive. A link to a donation page in the about dialog might be OK. Maybe putting a donation address as a default entry in the address book would also be OK.

Donated funds should only be used to help the Satoshi client development group (and this fact should be made very clear to donators). Having a "Bitcoin foundation" tied to the software makes me uneasy.

[zellfaze]

If the Bitcoin project is going to have a donation address at all I think it needs to be implemented as described in this topic (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=53177.0).  The system that they work out in that topic requires two separate parties to generate private keys that are then matemagically turned into a single private key that neither of them know.  Then they matemagically make a public key of that by doing some crazy math with the separate public keys.

Anyhow, boils down to multiple parties having to corroborate in order to spend the money.  Either that or https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0011 needs implemented.

I just don't trust one person having control of an address that is listed to be donated to on every copy of the Satoshi client.  I'm all for the idea of having a donate button, but trust comes up as a big issue if we add one.

BIP_0011 would probably be better since it would not require trust between the users. With the proposed scheme, the private key has to be computed at least once by combining secrets. Having the block chain and the nodes arbitrate this would be much less risky and would not require extra trust.

I agree that BIP_0011 would be the better route as the private key would have to be computed if they want to spend the money so it would only be secure until the first time they needed to perform a transaction (along with the other reasons you mentioned).

I voted no because a button is way too obtrusive. A link to a donation page in the about dialog might be OK. Maybe putting a donation address as a default entry in the address book would also be OK.

Donated funds should only be used to help the Satoshi client development group (and this fact should be made very clear to donators). Having a "Bitcoin foundation" tied to the software makes me uneasy.

I disagree about the button being obtrusive.  It could easily be hidden away in a menu somewhere out of the way.  I do on the other hand agree that the funds would have to be for use with the Satoshi client dev group.  If we have a "Bitcoin Foundation" it should be tied to the protocol itself instead of a particular client.

EDIT:

Also if we do this, it is going to be a trend setter I am sure.  The alt clients will likely begin to implement similar things.  By making it clear that the money is going to the dev group for dev related projects, we set a precedent that other clients will follow in their dialogs.

[AlexWaters]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMOkGiRbwFM

Big shout out to Matt Corallo for most of the work done to help build Bitcoin from source via Jenkins. Also, Gavin and the rest of the development team obviously. I would mention people, but I try to keep my videos short...

[wumpus]

I disagree about the button being obtrusive.  It could easily be hidden away in a menu somewhere out of the way.  

Right, it shouldn't be an "in your face" blinking button.

Apart from that, I agree with the idea. I'm sure there are people that want to donate to the project, so why not give them the option.

[paraipan]

I voted no because a button is way too obtrusive. A link to a donation page in the about dialog might be OK. Maybe putting a donation address as a default entry in the address book would also be OK.

Donated funds should only be used to help the Satoshi client development group (and this fact should be made very clear to donators). Having a "Bitcoin foundation" tied to the software makes me uneasy.

+1, let's keep it simple

[Gavin Andresen]

The advice here is very relevant:
  http://producingoss.com/en/money.html

[finway]

I think some funding will be good.

[PrintCoins]

Is Bitcoin an organization that can be donated to?

Do we want new users of bitcoin to think there is a central authority?

Is this client really Bitcoin? I think of it more as the protocol which this client happens to speak.

Pardon my knee-jerk response to the establishment of something that will likely benefit bitcoin on the whole. It is just my anti-establishment mania.

[AlexWaters]

Gavin: there is a really interesting point about features going to the highest bidder. That definitely would be a problem; and goes against the core of what I believe Bitcoin can be.

Perhaps if donations were anonymous and/or limited in size, we could avoid those power issues?

Honestly I prefer the system admin scenario where individuals are funded by corporations, tbh I really don't know what the right answer is. I do know that Bitcoin has infrastructure needs, and anonymous donations might help solve some of the current issues.

[westkybitcoins]

I don't think it's a good idea.

There's an issue more important than who the money goes to. The money can go to a non-profit org, can be split among the core developers, whatever... each proposition has it's own pluses and minuses.

But the tricky question is, who owns the address the client lets you send money to? I'm of the mindset that each bitcoin address, for a number of reasons, needs to be owned by exactly one person or entity (corporation, whatever), for all time.

If a literal, formal organization was created, say The Satoshi Bitcoin Client Corp, with some specific person or group of people that had ultimate control over the organization, and this organization was the official owner of the address, I could possibly see it. As it stands now, it appears as if the community is trying to create some sort of "public property" donation address, and I just don't like how that's going to wind up working out.

[davux]

I wouldn't like a Donate button, but in the "About" window there could be a (clickable) Bitcoin address.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

Me likes this.
+1 to donate button.

[paraipan]

@ppl wanting a "Donate" button, you should be thinking more than a second what this means for the community and the pros and cons will bring us too. Some of you guys running away from centralization will achieve exactly that by supporting a central donation place.

I currently support this project any way that i can and even donate to the core developers a small bit to have them continue their awesome work. I don't need a donate button for that. If Gavin gets big part of the donations he will probably share it with his most trustworthy fellow programmers.

quote form Gavin's link...

A widely-used project can sometimes get significant contributions, from both individuals and organizations, just by having an online donation button, or sometimes by selling branded merchandise such as coffee mugs, T-shirts, mousepads, etc. A word of caution: if your project accepts donations, plan out how the money will be used before it comes in, and state the plans on the project's web site. Discussions about how to allocate money tend to go a lot more smoothly when held before there's actual money to spend; and anyway, if there are significant disagreements, it's better to find that out while it's still academic.

[PrintCoins]

@ppl wanting a "Donate" button, you should be thinking more than a second what this means for the community and the pros and cons will bring us too. Some of you guys running away from centralization will achieve exactly that by supporting a central donation place.

I currently support this project any way that i can and even donate to the core developers a small bit to have them continue their awesome work. I don't need a donate button for that. If Gavin gets big part of the donations he will probably share it with his most trustworthy fellow programmers.

quote form Gavin's link...

A widely-used project can sometimes get significant contributions, from both individuals and organizations, just by having an online donation button, or sometimes by selling branded merchandise such as coffee mugs, T-shirts, mousepads, etc. A word of caution: if your project accepts donations, plan out how the money will be used before it comes in, and state the plans on the project's web site. Discussions about how to allocate money tend to go a lot more smoothly when held before there's actual money to spend; and anyway, if there are significant disagreements, it's better to find that out while it's still academic.

I totally agree with you. A donate button leads way too much to creating a centralized bitcoin authority.

I would rather the main client not be sponsored. This puts it at a level playing field with other client developers. Ideally, I would like this client to not be important anymore, and have 20 competing bitcoin clients of merit. Some designed for simple users, some designed for sophisticated account management.

(note of bias: I am working on creating my own client)