On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 12:10:08AM +0530, Sirtaj Singh Kang wrote: >> Currencies are consensual belief systems. Bitcoin will remain >> useful as long as there are no effective attacks against >> the cryptosystem and/or the infrastructure, and people continue >> to believe in it. > > This is equally true of baseball cards.
I don't know what baseball cards are. I know a guy who's behind the Chimgauer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency which is a special case of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_currency >> Bitcoin is unlikely to be it, but it will have successors and >> competitors. > > I agree. The advantage of different cryptosystems and implementations is that they remove the single point of failure. It's one thing losing a play money wallet with 50 EUR, another entirely with 50 kEUR. >> I don't consider it either thorough, or compelling. It's full of >> forceful >> assertions, strawmen, and errors. > > I don't agree. There is enough meat in there that requires a cogent > rebuttal (eg the idea that "real" currencies are backed by people with > guns - something that I've seen from bitcoin supporters themselves). None of the currencies I linked above are backed up by people with guns. In fact, people with guns oppose alternative currencies just as they insist on the state's power monopoly. The question is how enforcible this is these days. In absence of a police state, not very. Any smartphone would do these days. > This piece has received enough play now that a good rebuttal is very > likely to appear. If you happen to come across one, I'd appreciate if > you'd link to it here. If you're trying to bait me into taking down the takedown, I'm afraid I'm insufficiently interested. -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org";>leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
