public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: [bitcoin-dev] Requirement for pseudonymous BIP submissions
@ 2017-03-19 23:43 muyuu
  2017-03-24  2:18 ` hozer
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: muyuu @ 2017-03-19 23:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: bitcoin-dev

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 993 bytes --]

If this was in place I would contribute more and I wouldn't have to create
throw-away accounts.

This is not a space where you want to be a recognisable target.

Today, BitFury's CEO threatened to sue developers if they didn't kowtow to
his demands to leave the PoW alone. This is unacceptable. Decisions have to
be made on merit and the interest of the project, and nothing else.

This is very important and needs to be given priority. Most Core developers
and all the main ones except Satoshi have built a public persona, either
for ego or for practical monetary reasons. Obviously there's academia where
everything is about plastering your name as much as possible and getting
cited. So it's understood. Although I understand the difficulty of getting
funded and getting trusted without a face, there needs to be an outlet so
people can interact and contribute in a proper cypherpunk way.

Also, GitHub is quite anti-privacy. So I recommend not reusing personal
accounts from work.

-muyuu

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1157 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <mailman.29.1489924803.11420.bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>]
* [bitcoin-dev] Requirement for pseudonymous BIP submissions
@ 2017-03-18 15:23 Chris Stewart
  2017-03-18 16:57 ` Andrew Johnson
                   ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Chris Stewart @ 2017-03-18 15:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3329 bytes --]

As everyone in the Bitcoin space knows, there is a massive scaling debate
going on. One side wants to increase the block size via segwit, while the
other side wants to increase via hard fork. I have strong opinions on the
topic but I won’t discuss them here. The point of the matter is we are
seeing the politicization of protocol level changes. The critiques of these
changes are slowly moving towards critiques based on who is submitting the
BIP -- not what it actually contains. This is the worst thing that can
happen in a meritocracy.

*Avoiding politicization of technical changes in the future*

I like what Tom Elvis Judor did when he submitted his MimbleWimble white
paper to the technical community. He submitted it under a pseudonym, over
TOR, onto a public IRC channel. No ego involved — only an extremely
promising paper. Tom (and Satoshi) both understood that it is only a matter
of time before who they are impedes technical progress of their system.

I propose we move to a pseudonymous BIP system where it is required for the
author submit the BIP under a pseudonym. For instance, the format could be
something like this:

BIP: 1337

Author: 9458b7f9f76131f18823d73770e069d55beb271b@protonmail.com

BIP content down here

The hash “6f3…9cd0” is just my github username, christewart, concatenated
with some entropy, in this case these bytes:
639c28f610edcaf265b47b0679986d10af3360072b56f9b0b085ffbb4d4f440b

and then hashed with RIPEMD160. I checked this morning that protonmail can
support RIPEMD160 hashes as email addresses. Unfortunately it appears it
cannot support SHA256 hashes.

There is inconvenience added here. You need to make a new email address,
you need to make a new github account to submit the BIP. I think it is
worth the cost -- but am interested in what others think about this. I
don't think people submitting patches to a BIP should be required to submit
under a pseudonym -- only the primary author. This means only one person
has to create the pseudonym. From a quick look at the BIPs list it looks
like the most BIPs submitted by one person is ~10. This means they would
have had to create 10 pseudonyms over 8 years -- I think this is
reasonable.

*What does this give us?*

This gives us a way to avoid politicization of BIPs. This means a BIP can
be proposed and examined based on it’s technical merits. This levels the
playing field — making the BIP process even more meritocratic than it
already is.

If you want to claim credit for your BIP after it is accepted, you can
reveal the preimage of the author hash to prove that you were the original
author of the BIP. I would need to reveal my github username and
“639c28f610edcaf265b47b0679986d10af3360072b56f9b0b085ffbb4d4f440b”

*The Future*
Politicization of bitcoin is only going to grow in the future. We need to
make sure we maintain principled money instead devolving to a system where
our money is based on a democratic vote — or the votes of a select few
elites. We need to vet claims by “authority figures” whether it is Jihan
Wu, Adam Back, Roger Ver, or Greg Maxwell. I assure you they are human —
and prone to mistakes — just like the rest of us. This seems like a simple
way to level the playing field.

Thoughts?

-Chris

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5326 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2017-03-29  8:49 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-03-19 23:43 [bitcoin-dev] Requirement for pseudonymous BIP submissions muyuu
2017-03-24  2:18 ` hozer
     [not found]   ` <CAGL6+mEceO2D2ueeVgv20r5p6tsofMLSTN1ExWfGysJHuM5XfA@mail.gmail.com>
2017-03-28  1:31     ` Troy Benjegerdes
     [not found] <mailman.29.1489924803.11420.bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
2017-03-19 21:17 ` Steve Davis
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-03-18 15:23 Chris Stewart
2017-03-18 16:57 ` Andrew Johnson
2017-03-18 17:35   ` Chris Stewart
2017-03-18 19:15 ` Luke Dashjr
2017-03-24  2:30   ` Troy Benjegerdes
2017-03-29  8:49 ` Tom Zander

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox