Bitcoin Foundation hit by resignations over new director
reuters.com
reuters.com
The whole point of Bitcoin is decentralization, removing the requirement for trust, etc. The idea of a centralized foundation vested with representing, effectively, the entirety of "Bitcoin's Interests" strikes me as diametrically opposed to that concept. The members of the foundation have various interests that may or may not be in keeping with the spirit of Bitcoin, and such an organization provides perfect cover for re-making Bitcoin in their image.
This first occurred to me when the foundation became the de facto spokesbody in response to Congressional and regulatory inquiry. How did these self-appointed people suddenly have the right to decide what regulation, etc. was acceptable to the whole of the Bitcoin community?
Surely, there needs to be some advocacy. But, it seems that such advocacy would take a more radical, de-centralized, democratic form that is more akin to Bitcoin itself.
In fact, I'd be a lot happier if the organization employing the core devs didn't have an active policy position at all.
DEN - The Untold Story: http://www.swfcabin.com/open/1400285657
Even today, it's still totally relevant to the BitCoin Foundation:
"The Internet is basically one big pyramid scam. Those who get in on the top get rich. Those who get in at the bottom get fucked. So, do you want to get rich, or do you want to get fucked?"
I have no clue what this foundation about, who are these people, but still can use bitcoin (or any altcoin really.) I guess this news article is for general public who might think Bitcoin Foundation have some kind of stake at this technology or something.
Bitcoin == Bitcoin Foundation
Simply put, the foundation shouldn't exists in its current form. A handful of Bitcoin entrepreneurs doesn't represent the interests of ALL MANKIND'S need for various levels of computed trust. In effect, a foundation's job would simply be pushing a PR agenda for the movement. You don't need to waste effort or, more importantly, time in electing a board to go hire a PR firm.
My plan is to put together a basic marketing plan, go peddle it to a few top PR firms, and then let them take it and run with it. Because it's Bitcoin, the marketing campaign can be crowdsourced, even to the point the ads themselves contain QR codes for keeping the ads running. Imagine a Bart splash campaign at all the stations, with QR codes to track the funding and length of time they run. You could check on the funds and donate if you wanted to keep it going.
Anyway, it's all about marketing in the new economy. We don't need a foundation. We need traditional marketing and, frankly, some crisis marketing thrown in for good measure.
I fail to see the difference, other than the fact that you're doing it instead of those people.
This is what I said:
> and then let them take it and run with it...the marketing campaign can be crowdsourced
Marketing will get done regardless of whether there is someone at the top or not. I didn't rant on in my post about decentralization of power just to put myself or someone else at the top. I'm talking about taking a methodology of raising interest and making it a global effort.
Whether that can be done or not is TBD, but I'm going to give it a whirl and see what happens.
It's a key built in to the network that essentially gives him the power to broadcast a special alert signal to the network. I'm not actually sure if most clients are equipped to interpret these signals now, though.
http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/583/what-is-the-a...
edit: I should clarify it's built into the original satoshi client, not necessarily 'the network' and certainly not the blockchain. Someone on bitcointalk explained it as "part of the peer to peer overlay and not part of the blockchain. You can find this public key in the source code of the official client if you look."