switch to the new bitcoin.org

[saivann]

implement multilanguage
new improved clients list page
update history and statistics in the "about" page
add "Some things you need to know" page
add "Support Bitcoin" page
add a contextual presentation for each category of users (individuals, organizations, developers and enthusiasts)
add a short and concise "how it works" page
add a "vocabulary" page for Bitcoin technical words definitions
give more visibility for the foundation
new website design and layout

[saivann]

Todays Gavin changes are included.
This version can be viewed live here : http://174.142.20.146/en/
If required, I can add a temporary top banner for v 0.8.1, since the news does not appear on the main page anymore.

[btc123]

Hi everyone.

First, I want to congratulate everyone working on the new design. Too often in the community people will complain and debate things without actually doing anything to help. So kudos to those working on the new design.

As an interested 3rd party, I'd like to know how strong the consensus on calling bitcoin a 'currency' is?

Would 'commodity' not be a better term?

In many countries, competing currencies are not legal. (I understand that bitcoin is not limited to just the US, but since it is the largest market its the place that matters for now)

Here's a transcript of two possible outcomes of Gavin talking to Anderson Cooper on CNN (which will happen one day) and debating a senator

A
AC: "Whats bitcoin?"
Gavin: "It's a Currency"
Senator ABC: "I'd like to warn our viewers that its illegal to use competing currencies not defined by a government as legal tender. any businesses considering accepting bitcoin can be subject to prosecution"
Gavin: "Uhhhhh.... Oh... oops"

B
AC: "Whats bitcoin?"
Gavin: "It's a digital commodity that has value like gold, and is easily transferrable"
Senator ABC: "Well golly gee! I like commodities, i've got a bunch of gold down here in Texas!"
Gavin: "yay bitcoins!"

If Bitcoin legality ever goes to a supreme court decision, the issue will be is it a currency (illegal) or commodity(legal)? The bitcoin community will at that point shout "Its a commodity!". Then the prosecution will pull up bitcoin.org and say 'Look, the devs/website calls it a currency"

Has anyone studied the legal side of things? Are there any lawyers and philosophers out there who believe one term will cause less headaches and better PR in the future?

Also, is this the best place to discuss? or on the forums?

[saivann]

Thanks, there is indeed a lot of work there! :-)

That question has been raised in bitcointalk legal forum. And I asked more legal feedback by email on this and I'm waiting for answers. I think that is a genuine concern. If you know lawyers that can give us their advise, it will be appreciated.

However this new version actually is not a regression : previous website also used these words. The same question also applies to the "what is bitcoin" video and the main page of the Bitcoin foundation.

[btc123]

Right, whoever is going to green-light the final copy should definitely spend some time on this with some lawyers.

Its probably a big deal. Words and definitions matter more then most think.

[luke-jr]

Basis for claim that competing currencies are illegal in the US? The only law I'm aware of that's anything remotely like this is specific to metal coinage.

[btc123]

Anyone seen this?

http://www.fincen.gov/statutes_regs/guidance/pdf/FIN-2013-G001.pdf

"Virtual currency does not meet the criteria to be considered “currency” under the BSA, because it is not legal tender."

[gavinandresen]

ACK. I think this is ready to be pulled.

[saivann]

I also think so now that I've synced french version with recent changes. Any other ACK needed?

[gmaxwell]

Now that the webwallets are behind a warning, can we list the other major ones?

[jgarzik]

1. Call it transaction validation or "transaction validation (mining)" etc. Mining is an unfamiliar concept and term to new users.

2. In general, disappointed that so many convenient, front-page links are now moved to sub-pages. (note, not a NAK)

[saivann]

I agree with that (webwallets), I just didn't find the time to write a good description for each yet. I planned to do another pull request a few days later (and do the same with other improvement suggestions that are waiting).

[saivann]

jgarzik :

1. You probably refer to the titles in the "how it works" page?

2. However, these links are now at hands and visible from any place in the website, not just in the home page. Though I'm not against doing other changes in the future following general opinion.

[saivann]

I added more web wallet services, is it good enough for now?

Also, I think we shouldn't be scared to publish this one and improve things later. Initial publication is not meant to be an end. In fact, it might be easier to treat next improvements seperately.

Please let me know if any more ACK is needed,

[jgarzik]

hrm

Do we really want "© The Bitcoin Foundation 2009–2013" at the bottom of every page?

1. The code is copyright "the bitcoin developers"
2. Bitcoin Foundation did not exist in 2009

[saivann]

I thought linking to the foundation seemed more organized and all link to the foundation are likely to bring us more help. But I don't mind changing it. During the legal review, greg also pointed that the Foundation didn't exist by 2009 but added that this was still appropriate if the website existed in 2009. That doesn't mean the Foundation holds the copyright since the beginning.

[saivann]

jgarzik request about the bottom copyright has been re-asked to me by Patrick Murck. I switched back to the previous bottom copyright line.