[P2P-F] bitcoin critique summary

Fri May 20 22:58:12 CEST 2011

I agree with Robin that bitcoin is great as proof of concept that
peer-designed and peer-adopted currencies are workable, but, they're
conventional design also makes them compatible and not so transformative,
but I believe this is a necessary first step ...

crowdfunding, social lending are not dissimilar, they distribute and extend
the pool, but still work within the existing paradigms; they're only one
step forward, not the end-game,

Michel

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:20 PM, robin <robokow at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Karl Robillard <krobillard at san.rr.com>
> wrote:
> > I don't see how the alternative currency experiments like Bitcoin do
> anything
> > to help us move to a more egalitarian, steady-state economy.
> >
>
> I don't think so either - because of the way it is designed (as a
> global and conventional currency). BUT bitcoin does do something else:
> it shows that it is possible to use p2p technology to actually run a
> currency. That's a pretty mean thing - and as an experiment it proves
> pretty succesfull so far. It is pretty wicked to see how I as a
> participant owe my own wallet for example and can make any
> bitcoin-payment without commission, and at the same time fully
> transparant (and if you want anonymous).
>
> That's unique, and as such the technology could maybe also be used in
> different ways, by smaller communities even? This technology might
> open up a tremendous amounts of options in the future for your own
> steady-state economies.
>
> Today though we see Bitcoin being used for an overwhelming amount of
> speculation, as more and more people step in and supply is limited.
> 800% increase in just one month is tremendous by the way. Interesting
> to see what comes next!
>
> http://d2o7bfz2il9cb7.cloudfront.net/main-qimg-61d8b2b4ff677206fd8b5d5288191b16
> See also http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=9098.msg131690#msg131690
>
> The critique in the article quoted by Michel is interesting to read
> but is argued from a pretty conventional economic perspective. And why
> would it be a scam if it is pretty clear from the start that it
> benefits early adapters? And also, why would there not be banks who
> would start backing it up? As soon as institutions start having a
> vested interest, they will back it up. And does it actually need any?
> Only future can tell.
>
> And yes, I do agree that one day bitcoin will go down. But that's only
> natural. Any currency eventually falls. Some just sooner than others.
> And maybe one day even a state will start issuing this type of
> p2p-based currencies.
>
> Robin.
>
> _______________________________________________
> P2P Foundation - Mailing list
> http://www.p2pfoundation.net
> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
>

-- 
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20110521/7b921227/attachment.htm 