[ad_1]
"Hell, it's a food fight here. [Bitcoin developer] Matt Corallo is angry with Blockstream. Ragnar and Giacomo Zucco chatting with people on the left and right. Wat is happening! "
This text written by an enthusiastic friend of Bitcoin well describes the confusion on Twitter's social media platform in recent days, as influential members of the developer and ecosystem of startups fought for the "culture" of Bitcoin and to know if it needed to be changed or improved.
The root of the debate: Does Bitcoin have a culture problem? Is there too much "toxicity"? And yet, Twitter being a child's game, the debate involved all kinds of sub-sections, focused on other questions: is bitcoin sufficiently inclusive? Why is Twitter so hard? And what, exactly is Bitcoin culture?
It's hard to say exactly how the fiery battle has begun, but it seems to have come from a tweet from Soona Amhaz, co-founder of Token Daily. declarer: "Some brilliant developers of the heart of the ethereum have personally confided to me that they have turned to [antagonized] by the bitcoin community. Play a long game or you will lose talent. "
In the ensuing discussion, Neil Woodfine, Blockstream's chief marketing officer, said the bitcoin culture may seem unwelcoming, in part because of the large number of fraudsters in the industry who are trying to earn money quickly. ;money.
And those in the ecosystem that have been around for more idealistic reasons, have grown to reject this state of mind in a sometimes harsh way.
"The culture of the Bitcoin industry is therefore * necessarily * leaning on extreme skepticism, cynicism, rigorous badysis and direct language," said Woodfine. tweeted, add:
"If you're not happy with the bitcoin culture, sorry, you're the problem. Bitcoin is better without you, you are not up to the challenges ahead. You are not well under pressure, you are too sensitive and you lack conviction. "
Others, from Woodfine's "side" in the debate (though the debate has been so harsh and messy that it's hard to pin down the real sides), argue that the bitcoin community has been misunderstood. hardened by the debates over the years. The best-known of these debates is the debate over the Bitcoin expansion, which ended suddenly with the interruption of a minority of Bitcoins to create bitcoin money.
In short, it is argued that if the community may seem unwelcoming, it is because it has had to dispel many bad ideas along the way.
"Gaslighting Bullshit"
But Woodfine's thread, although popular, did not fit everyone.
"They are bullshit diesel," m said Neha Narula, research director for MIT's Digital Currency Initiative, describes Woodfine's thread as "disguise".
This part of the debate suggests that there is something wrong with Bitcoin's "culture": it's not enough to be content with the way things are going, and people should be more inclined to include people in the community.
"Always question, never solve, and know that many of us try to debate, criticize, learn and progress without being fools," Narula later wrote.
Others have similar reservations about the idea that the Bitcoin culture is static, arguing that the culture is not static.
"Totally False It's ridiculous that some guys on Twitter are saying what Bitcoin culture is and should be forever, we are still building culture and we can * improve it." argued John Newbery, developer of Chaincode, explained that the developers of bitcoins were not a very diverse group and that he wanted people from different cultural backgrounds to feel better welcomed.
Matt Corallo, a Bitcoin developer, blocked Blockstream's OSC, Samson Mow, before arguing that some people in Bitcoin's technology startup, Blockstream, were "toxic." Corallo helped found the startup in 2014.
Never again
It might seem that this mbadive debate has come out of nowhere. According to researcher Paul Sztorc, people in the community simply do not have time to talk about these concerns until the debate is over.
"Usually, when people argue, it's because a lot of unsolved problems have boiled over time. Then it is triggered by a small event – the straw that broke the camel, as they say, "said Sztorc.
On this note, some participants see the truth on both sides of the debate.
"Some people say we should promote a better, more inclusive and respectful culture. Other people say [peer-to-peer] network protocols must remain neutral and not worry about cultural issues. They are both right. argued Ciphrex co-founder Eric Lombrozo, however, said that Twitter's culture – which he described as "a majority of guys trying to win stupid prices" – is not representative of Bitcoin's global culture.
BitTorrent creator and bitcoin developer Bram Cohen also blame the "toxicity"On the social media platform Twitter in particular.
"Anyone who persists in being a fool should end up feeling uncomfortable, but the default badumption should be that people simply have not yet learned the standards and explained what is their due," he said. he declared.
Meanwhile, others drew alternative conclusions about the state of the bitcoin community from the debate.
Like Woodfine tweeted:
"After this weekend, no one claims more than Bitcoin is an echo chamber."
Twitter logo image via Shutterstock
[ad_2]
Source link
