>
> dear Joerg,
>
> On Thu, 22 May 2014, Joerg Platzer wrote:
>

>>    The reason, why I am still a member is because I see a clear
>>    struggle going on inside foundation between the 'let's get some
>>    regulation in here'-idiots on one hand and people with exactly the
>>    same spirit which is expressed by most folks on this list here and
>>    which I share on the other side.

>
> this is a very good, useful and much needed attitute. outposts must be
> kept, not abandoned out of frustration. abandoning is weak and benefits
> noone. We need you there. IMHO.


Note: I am still a member of Bitcoin Foundation but I'm letting my
membership expire which it will in early 2015. I continue to contribute
with Foundation stuff in various ways but as for those who think they need
to "meet, confer, collaborate" etc. with regulators or that "something
needs to happen" to somehow rein in the "ill effects" of bitcoin or those
who believe that "suits and votes" somehow mean something.... I really
want nothing to do with that. If the Foundation wants to keep heading in
that direction and collecting money from its members for "votes" (the bit
where they collect large sums from "Industry members" as a means to sell
the "Industry members" special "voting rights" and meandering down a
delusional path, so be it, but I want no part of such a shared delusion -
the Foundation and its "votes" doesn't represent Bitcoin, but I will
continue to help with github repositor(ies) that are educational, that
were developed originally due to Foundation effort, that still do help
inform people about bitcoin.
I should point out you need not be a Foundation member to do that. Anyone
can do it.
see https://github.com/btcfoundationedcom/btcfoundationedcom.github.io


>

>>    What if a group of dark-wallet / dark-market enthusiasts (of which
>>    I am one) forms a group inside the foundation and demands funding
>>    for precisely these projects without compromising on any of the
>>    functionality? This might get more support than you believe.

>
> I think this is a good idea, but it depends on how much people here have
> to do something like that, considering we are talking about a foundation
> of white collars with very few developers on one side and of a group
> here of visionary developers, the difference is not only ideological but
> based on the nature of labour offered by its members.

As for funding, I applied for a (Bitcoin Foundation) grant to get some
project that I really am into (http://abis.io) funded through the Bitcoin
Foundation but I relatively recently (some short number of days ago) found
out that the Foundation had decided not to award anything to it. Moving
on I continue to dedicate time and energy constantly to the project and
I'm happy for a recent merge with spesmilo/sx at
https://github.com/spesmilo/sx/tree/master/tools that features
http://abis.io
I now will be working with local anarchist film student as well as my
taekwondo master who have both agreed to work with me on a film called
'Breaking Through' which features demonstrations of breaking blocks but
also to giving and sharing concepts in the context of the http://abis.io
project.

Finally I was also invited recently and I agreed to join the Lifeboat
Advisory Board so I will spend some time there periodically helping and I
hope my ideas will be better received in that sphere than they were in the
Bitcoin Foundation. It is only a few days ago that I agreed to help the
Lifeboat Foundation in an advisory capacity, so I look forward to seeing
what that brings.

Look, if people want to believe that centralization and law and order and
people being able to impose their own view of the world on others is just
the greatest thing, then they can believe in and share that delusion. But
if a little logic and math proves them wrong, I don't feel compelled to
engage with them further, at the very least not in forums. Sure, we can
quibble about whether or not to use a license and if so what kind and to
what end. When all is said and done, does the idea work? Will it spread?
Will the implementation take not because of some coercion, but because
people examine and use (voluntarily!) what you've done? Ideas that
liberate people from centralized structures of power work not only on
paper, but when they are implemented, too. Maybe a boiled down way of
saying this, and it's a bit of oversimplification, but here it is:
Decentralization wins.



>
> Said that, I hope people here finds the time. Myself nosing around the
> Italian affiliated foundation, I'm not sure that is opened to any
> entrance - just look at the bitcointalk italian forum section: self
> appointed hostfat moderator and foundation president has complete
> hegemony on it, I'm also not aware of a board nor of a formal entity
> opens to any membership.
>

>>    And, while we're at it: why not be real about it and actually
>>    UNlicensing the code of dark wallet, which as far as know, is
>>    actually still under some statist-license, actually relying on the
>>    armed power of the government to enforce it?

>
> Sorry to comment on all points with an opinion, don't take me as a d1ck
> plz, but I think this is a bad idea. I recommend you see the use of
> licensing as it is as tactical: sure it is not ideal, but we don't leave
> in an ideal world and protection in enemy territory must be effective
> against enemy tactics.
>
> One could argue that darkwallet cannot be used in any case against its
> principles, but I'm not sure about that.
>
> ciao
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>