Where communities thrive

  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
  • Jun 20 2016 02:11
    @alexvandesande banned @algotrader2013
  • Jun 05 2016 10:31
    @alexvandesande banned @adamskee
Brent Allsop

@bobsummerwill, You are bringing up some very important stuff. We’re working on what were calling the “Ethereum Consensus Project” (https://canonizer.com/topic/210-Ethereum-Consensus-Project/1) at Canonizer.com. It would be great to start a topic to see if some consensus can be built around some of your ideas. For example, we need to get a topic started around the Ether EIP process. Would you mind helping us craft a topic around your ideas so we can find out how many people do and do not agree with this?

Also, as we tweeted here: https://twitter.com/StallionCornell/status/1174439694643298304, we need help tracking consensus for (or against) ProgPoW.

Micah Zoltu
FWIW: If the EIP process (or any other part of Ethereum development) required a DCO I would immediately stop contributing.
I'm in this space because I'm sufficiently frustrated with "the real world" and I want to create a new, better world.
I don't want to just make a copy of "the real world" that sucks in all of the same ways.
Part of that world I want to live in is one without patents/copyrights, where everything is just public domain and there are no patents.
Another part is that the participants in the system are valued based on their contribution, not based on the ability to use threats of violence against them to get them to capitulate.
Separately, a DCO doesn't actually solve anything since anyone can trivially lie on it. Even if you require full KYC, such measures are not that hard to bypass by a motivated actor. This means that a DCO effectively reduces to legal theater, where companies are just saying "well, we tried, if someone sneaks a patent into our code it isn't our fault" when they get taken to court.
TL;DR: Patents bad. Copyright bad. DCO is legal theater. Old world sucks. New world is good.
Marius van der Wijden
I have also not found any legal disputes that suggest that DCOs would have solved the problem.
Which means that DCOs would probably not help us in a legal dispute with people contributing copyrighted code.
Regarding patents: Patents can not be applied in reverse. Once something is published, you can not get a patent on it anymore, so the argument that Craig Wright or someone would hold a patent on ProgPoW is invalid.
Micah Zoltu
@MariusVanDerWijden I believe the argument is that someone patents something, and then submits code that is beholden to that patent to some open source project.
After the project is released, they then demand royalties from the aforementioned project.
Marius van der Wijden
But every patent application has to be public, so we would know if someone holds a patent on something
Micah Zoltu
The volume of patent applications around the planet is high enough that you would need a task force of people whose sole job it was to keep up-to-date on all patents and monitor all code changes.
This is a massive bureaucratic overhead, to the point that it is simply unreasonable/unrealistic to actually execute on.
Marius van der Wijden
So we need to put patent applications on a blockchain?
Micah Zoltu
My proposal is to abolish patent law. :shrug:
Or in the case of individuals, just ignore it.
In the US alone there are over 300,000 patents granted per year.
Worldwide it is probably close to 1M.
Of course, not all of them are software patents. But it gives you an idea as to the scale of the problem.
At a glance, it appears that in the US there are around 18,000 software patents granted per year.
And it appears about 500,000 software patents total in the US as of a few years ago.
So this team of people would need to be familiar with all 500,000 existing patents, plus keep abreast of all new patents, and be able to identify if any code being submitted was patented.
Micah Zoltu
Since this is unrealistic, even for a large company like Microsoft or Google, the legal theater solution to the problem is to require that any contributor must attest that their contribution doesn't violate a patent. This gives the company plausible deniability if patented code enters their system, and they can shift the blame to the author of the code. Since the author of the code likely is not worth trying in court, this largely indemnifies the company against patent suits.
Dynamite article from Jeff Benson of Decrypt

I do not think that DCOs are magic. I do think they would help.

We also need to be more sceptical about contributions from anonymous contributors, whether or not we choose to change our process.

Do we need code so badly that we proceed even given these unknowns?

We should not be afraid of the "conspiracy theorist" tag when there is real risk to the protocol.

A syndicated Decrypt article. The likening to Leni Riefenstahl a bit offensive.
Bob Summerwill
It is because of her Hitler comment.
Which she begged me to delete from my blog today.
I refused.
It was very telling of her lack of discernment.
I know why it is, but you either misunderstood the comment or intentionally tried to make it look bad. Leni Riefenstahl was criticized for making Nazi Propaganda videos. Not attempting to educate about mining at a shitcoin conference.
this isn't the place for this conversation, so I'll leave it
Micah Zoltu
The solution to disagreement is not excommunication, it is more communication, education, and dialog.
I agree with her that given the opportunity to educate a group of people who may have divergent views from you is a reasonable course of action. The best way to build bridges (which people can then walk across) is by taking every opportunity you can to create meaningful dialog with people who you disagree with. The best way to do this is to find a topic that you agree on and can talk meaningfully about first, then after the dialog is open you may expand that dialog into discussing things you disagree on.
While I may not like Craig Wright or Hitler, I think her stance of being willing to speak to their followers about something is an opportunity to create dialog, and thus bridges.
When you have people who are excommunicated from everyone except those with shared world views, they end up in an echo chamber that reinforces their belief system. If we excommunicate all BSV followers because Craig Wright is a bad guy, then we end up leaving potentially innocent, manipulated, people to the echo chamber that is BSV and they don't have a path out.
TL;DR: I'm against the bashing of @OhGodAGirl on the grounds that she spoke at conferences put on by people who you personally disagree with, and I think that kind of excommunication/censorship is not a good path for Ethereum (or the world) to follow.
Micah Zoltu
As far as the Hitler comment, out of respect I think the "right" thing to do is delete it per her request. Separately, I think people are way too triggered by the world "Hitler" these days and it is sad to me that she feels the need to remove that comment (though I fully understand it).
Bob Summerwill
I won't be deleting it - because she said it.
Also many people have taken screenshots of her saying it.
Also because it has been reported in multiple news articles now.
She cannot unsay it.
Me pretending that she didn't say it cannot undo that.
As for "ex-communication", there is a line.
I have drawn mine.
And not just on the basis of her associations, but on the basis of her own actions which I have witnessed in the last few days from her directly, and what I have been told of many, many people's incredibly negative first hand experiences with her.
She is a serial liar too.
I want nothing to do with her.
You want to hang with her and try to "educate her", @MicahZoltu?
Be my guest.
But doing so is below my own ethical standards.
And is also a waste of my time. She will leach me as she has leached others.
Would you hang out with Craig Wright yourself?

I think she had the same kind of level of integrity, from what I have seen.

The fact that she is CTO of a company whose primary customer is Calvin Ayre and who Craig Wright advises (and that she got that job by securing that deal, apparently), is very telling. She is cut of the same cloth.

Bob Summerwill
If you feel that ProgPOW, coming from such a character, is just fine, and that Ethereum being inclusive is more important than protecting the integrity of the platform, then we have very different point of views.

At first I thought that this was just "by association", and that those associations were maybe conflated. Also that "conspiracy theories" around Kristy (like the links with NVIDIA) was maybe conflated. And that she was an innocent.

She is so far from that. She is the problem herself. All the stink around her is because of her actions and patterns of behaviour.

She associates with scammers, frauds and liars because she is a scammer, fraud and a liar.
Bob Summerwill
Somebody pointed me to this today. Think it is relevant:
Brent Allsop

@MicahZoltu said: “The solution to disagreement is not excommunication, it is more communication, education, and dialog.”

Excommunication is definitely not good, but “more communication” doesn’t scale. If more than 10 people are trying to talk, the important stuff gets lost in the noise. Currently, censoring is the only way to resolve the scaling issue when many people want to speak, and that shuts out a large number of people. Canonizer solves these problems because it can scale. You can find out, concisely and quantitatively, what millions of people want to say, so everyone can get a voice. But this does take a bit of work to negotiate between everyone who wants to speak, for everyone, in the smallest number of camp statements, building as much consensus as possible.

just gonna leave this here