About Me
Hello! I am a twenty-year-old software engineering student at the Milwaukee School of Engineering. Software engineering is much more than a career choice for me. I am passionate about open source software, applied cryptography, and Bitcoin. For more information regarding my short experience, please see my résumé at https://trevinhofmann.com/resume.pdf.
Bitcoin
I first discovered Bitcoin in early 2013 while news circulated of capital controls in Cyprus. From that point on, I have been diving into Bitcoin with excitement. After the summer of 2013, I moved to Milwaukee for my freshman year of college. During the first quarter, I was fortunate enough to begin working remotely with a young European Bitcoin company. From this opportunity, I learned more about the inner workings of Bitcoin while working on a mining pool, mobile multisignature wallet, and an escrow-based marketplace. Along with other hobby projects, I created an open source block chain explorer called MyChain. Although it was not the most beautifully designed, I was proud of its relatively efficient database indexing.
Bitcoin is the most fascinating application of cryptography that I have found so far. I am beyond optimistic about its ability to serve as a nearly perfect money for the modern economy.
Why Bitcoin Unlimited?
Bitcoin may be about to demonstrate its antifragility once again. Although the downfall of Mt. Gox was a large temporary setback for Bitcoin, the subsequent diversification of exchanges led to a much healthier ecosystem. Similarly, I think that Bitcoin benefits as users and miners diversify their full node implementations.
In my opinion, Bitcoin Unlimited is currently the most intriguing proposal related to the block size limit. It emphasizes removing consensus decisions from the developers and giving that power to the users themselves. I would like to contribute to this experiment, although I do not pledge any sort of allegiance to it. If a better proposal appears, I am willing to support it.
My Plans as President
I am not optimistic about the organizational structure defined in the Articles of Federation. They seem to impose an unnecessary amount of bureaucracy that could slow development and provide little benefit. I believe that development of Bitcoin Unlimited can be led by a set of guiding principles similar to those found in the first Article. It is difficult to imagine a proposal that cannot be settled by the guiding principles of Bitcoin Unlimited. When a feature outside of the consensus model is proposed, we should accept any sane contributions that give the users a choice to enable such a feature. When a change to the consensus model is proposed, we should design a similar mechanism to the block size limit proposal in order to enable users to reach an emergent consensus of their own. In the rare situation that a debate is unable resolve in a way that satisfies all Bitcoin Unlimited users and developers, then the minority view can and should fork the project into their own. Forks of the code should be encouraged. Losers of a vote should not be told that they must concede their views.
Despite my pessimism, I am interested in giving this structure a fair chance. As President, I would ambitiously fulfill the duties outlined in the Articles. I would promote an active discussion and voting process for BUIPs. As a software engineer comfortable with both the inner workings of Bitcoin and the development and management of websites and forums, I would be able to work directly with both the Secretary and Developer to move Bitcoin Unlimited forward.
In the event that my pessimism regarding the organization structure defined in the Articles of Federation becomes apparently warranted, I would do my best to transition development into a more suitable model. After significant community engagement and given the required approval of a majority above 66% with at least 75% of members voting, I would make the necessary amendments to the Articles to move into a less bureaucratic framework. I would be fully willing to give up any Presidential powers in order to facilitate such a transition.
Conclusion
Thank you very much for reading and considering this submission. Please feel free to engage me with questions and comments.
Hello! I am a twenty-year-old software engineering student at the Milwaukee School of Engineering. Software engineering is much more than a career choice for me. I am passionate about open source software, applied cryptography, and Bitcoin. For more information regarding my short experience, please see my résumé at https://trevinhofmann.com/resume.pdf.
Bitcoin
I first discovered Bitcoin in early 2013 while news circulated of capital controls in Cyprus. From that point on, I have been diving into Bitcoin with excitement. After the summer of 2013, I moved to Milwaukee for my freshman year of college. During the first quarter, I was fortunate enough to begin working remotely with a young European Bitcoin company. From this opportunity, I learned more about the inner workings of Bitcoin while working on a mining pool, mobile multisignature wallet, and an escrow-based marketplace. Along with other hobby projects, I created an open source block chain explorer called MyChain. Although it was not the most beautifully designed, I was proud of its relatively efficient database indexing.
Bitcoin is the most fascinating application of cryptography that I have found so far. I am beyond optimistic about its ability to serve as a nearly perfect money for the modern economy.
Why Bitcoin Unlimited?
Bitcoin may be about to demonstrate its antifragility once again. Although the downfall of Mt. Gox was a large temporary setback for Bitcoin, the subsequent diversification of exchanges led to a much healthier ecosystem. Similarly, I think that Bitcoin benefits as users and miners diversify their full node implementations.
In my opinion, Bitcoin Unlimited is currently the most intriguing proposal related to the block size limit. It emphasizes removing consensus decisions from the developers and giving that power to the users themselves. I would like to contribute to this experiment, although I do not pledge any sort of allegiance to it. If a better proposal appears, I am willing to support it.
My Plans as President
I am not optimistic about the organizational structure defined in the Articles of Federation. They seem to impose an unnecessary amount of bureaucracy that could slow development and provide little benefit. I believe that development of Bitcoin Unlimited can be led by a set of guiding principles similar to those found in the first Article. It is difficult to imagine a proposal that cannot be settled by the guiding principles of Bitcoin Unlimited. When a feature outside of the consensus model is proposed, we should accept any sane contributions that give the users a choice to enable such a feature. When a change to the consensus model is proposed, we should design a similar mechanism to the block size limit proposal in order to enable users to reach an emergent consensus of their own. In the rare situation that a debate is unable resolve in a way that satisfies all Bitcoin Unlimited users and developers, then the minority view can and should fork the project into their own. Forks of the code should be encouraged. Losers of a vote should not be told that they must concede their views.
Despite my pessimism, I am interested in giving this structure a fair chance. As President, I would ambitiously fulfill the duties outlined in the Articles. I would promote an active discussion and voting process for BUIPs. As a software engineer comfortable with both the inner workings of Bitcoin and the development and management of websites and forums, I would be able to work directly with both the Secretary and Developer to move Bitcoin Unlimited forward.
In the event that my pessimism regarding the organization structure defined in the Articles of Federation becomes apparently warranted, I would do my best to transition development into a more suitable model. After significant community engagement and given the required approval of a majority above 66% with at least 75% of members voting, I would make the necessary amendments to the Articles to move into a less bureaucratic framework. I would be fully willing to give up any Presidential powers in order to facilitate such a transition.
Conclusion
Thank you very much for reading and considering this submission. Please feel free to engage me with questions and comments.
