2 ms·

That is cool, but the reason the existing monetary system doesn't have those properties is because government purposely didn't include them. Things like "Uncens

That is cool, but the reason the existing monetary system doesn't have those properties is because government purposely didn't include them. Things like "Uncensorable" and "Non-governmentally bound" and "Untraceable" might yet be tested and turn out to be illegal - falling afoul of, eg, laws against financing terrorists. If bitcoin attracts regulations, the technical aspects will lose to the social aspects. Overwhelming majorities of people obey financial law - see also, the tax system; people aren't in that voluntarily. These are not proven positive values. Yet.

colordrops 9y ago
That's a particular government's problem, not a problem with bitcoin. Considering that Bitcoin is non-local, there will always be a jurisdiction somewhere that allows transactions that are restricted somewhere else. That was the whole point behind Satoshi's design - to work around corrupt and overly restrictive governmental financial systems. If you find a problem with that, then fine, but it's not what we are discussing here, which is the claim that Bitcoin is a ponzi scheme.