Thread
Would somebody please explicity spell out the absolute worst thing about the Jeffrey Epstein files' connection to bitcoin? Please make sure you flag the sensitive content, because the way some of you are talking it sounds particularly DAMNING for Core/Blockstream et all.
Replies (4)
There isn't a smoking gun but that's not really how corruption generally works. Most capture and corruption is never explicit at all.
Bitcoin maintainers seeking capital for a designer baby farming from a pedo is not a great look. We need to think about what kinds of standards we have around the character and judgement of people with a lot of influence over the direction of critical software.
To be fair, Epstein's nefarious dealings were barely on anyone's radar in 2014. His extremely lenient sentencing in 2009 and his sprawling active social network indicate that, if anyone was seeking funding from him, it very likely wasn't with the full awareness (such as we have today, in retrospect) of what sort of awful shit he was up to.
Bryan Bishop seeking g funding from ANYONE for designer babies should reflect poorly on himself, and I don't see why that implicates the other core and core-adjacent people mentioned in the emails.
I agree but corruption is always going to operate in a cloud of plausible deniability. I don't like to see people rubbing elbows with this guy.
I watched the Bannon interview with him. If your baby-eating-dracula radar doesnt go off around a person like that, something is wrong.
I'm less concerned with shooting at individual reputations than I am that we put on our cultural armor going forward.
Let's put both the maintainers and the entrepreneurs on notice. We are the guardians of the network and we are not going to tolerate even the appearance of corruption.
Stop the presses.
