• NorthEdm@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Titled “The Ethereum Foundation Mandate,” the document featured ethereal illustrated scenes of glowing lights and anime-style characters voyaging through dark forests. The pages featured white text against a navy blue background and were adorned with cartoon flowers, rainbows and diamonds.

    And on page 11 — nestled between a winking anime woman and three yellow cats — was a suicide pledge.

    Authors, maintainers, editors and distributors of “this software” would pledge to ensure the software remained free and publicly accessible, and would also vow to “take his or her own life with a sword upon failure to uphold any of the pledges in this license,” the illustration read. It was labeled “Source Seppuku License,” an apparent reference to a traditional Japanese ritual suicide.

    To work in crypto you have to have a fairly high baseline separation from reality but this is impressive.

  • TootSweet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    4 days ago

    Jesus Fucking Christ.

    The decomposing corpse of the blockchain cult is getting even weirder than it was at the peak of the mania.

  • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    That they would produce a legal document with a clause like that and in such a childish format speaks of the general sleaziness of crypto.

  • lechekaflan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Looks like the funny money bros running the fucking cringeshit cult must come from 8chan.

    This is on par with Aum Shinrikyo and Happy Science. Shades of Lychee Light Club.

    Another reason to yell FUCK CRYPTO.

  • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 days ago

    I think this would be the best contract to sign. Including BS like that in it would make it easy to argue the contract is completely void. And given the timeline and threat of being fired. You can also argue it was obviously signed under duress.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      Risky in the current political climate, though. We’ll see where things go from here but the side that would support slavery for life contracts still has a sitting president (who is acting a bit too calm at having just lost the house and senate).

      • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        Yeah, but any litigation about this kind of thing always takes years. So either we have new leadership, or we are already totally screwed worse than the contract.

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          Hence it being risky as its impossible to tell what kind of people will have authority over the decision process if it ends up in court and what their values will be. What might be ridiculous to some are exactly the kind of “gotchas” that predatory people love.

  • Yew@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    4 days ago

    “If you reward making a stink with outcomes, then everyone will know that essentially making that kind of show both internally and externally is the way to cause outcomes inside of the EF,” he said, according to the lawsuit, which cited a recorded conversation between the pair.

    So he doubled down instead of removing a suicide pledge? Legitimately insane. Now he’s getting sued because of it. But from his point of view it was more about asserting who was in charge. He’s insane.

    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      This is the only part mentioning a license

      Supported projects must pledge that they will not change their open source or copyleft license in the future. Permissive licenses are accepted, viral copyleft licenses are appreciated, but merely source-available licenses are not tolerated.

      Edit: my bad. it’s in an image on page 11

  • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    If I had to legally defend the foundation my main argument would be that any proposed thousand-year policy is clearly satire, and that this was actually a test to weed out those who didn’t get it.

  • PumaStoleMyBluff@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    Huh, a guy I went to college with actually worked for EF for about 5 years. Looks like he left and joined Argot Collective a few months ago, though. Though I’m curious how different the culture there actually is.

  • Kaligalis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    4 days ago

    Ya all take this way too seriously. That seppuku license (definitely not enforceable in court btw) has probably been written after snorting a thick line of coke. These are crypto bros after all.