[cryptography] Bitcoin, was Nirvana
lodewijk andré de la porte
lodewijkadlp at gmail.com
Sun Sep 25 15:13:28 EDT 2011
The gold standard was fine as far as I know, as long as the gold flow was
steady. Gold isn't steady, Bitcoins totally are. Other than that I'd rather
trust in pet rocks* than in god and country, like US bills tell you to. If
you have any reason people should not use an unchanging coin without central
authority or requirement for trust, I'd REALLY like to hear it.
*a much more accurate way to name the things we're trading here is "a
Bitcoin" or "Bitcoins" when used in multiple. Caps optional.
P.S.: I believe we've had discussions about Bitcoins before, this is a
crypto list but cypherpunk/application is also important.
2011/9/24 John Levine <johnl at iecc.com>
> >> Yet Bitcoin, nonetheless, works.
> >How's BitCoin doing?
> As well as ever. If you want an economy based on pet rocks, which is
> what bitcoins are, it works fine. If you want an economy where people
> do the kinds of transactions they do with real money, not so great.
> Bitcoin's problems aren't the crypto, which as far as I can tell is
> quite sound. Bitcoin has all the economic problems an 18th c. gold
> standard has, except that it's a lot easier to steal bitcoins than to
> steal gold bars.
> cryptography mailing list
> cryptography at randombit.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cryptography