"Also there are three definitions on that page... Under the last definition bitcoin would be easily considered fiat." Then I regret citing it, it is wrong. Tha

"Also there are three definitions on that page... Under the last definition bitcoin would be easily considered fiat." Then I regret citing it, it is wrong. That third definition actually misrepresents its source (Mankiw's Principles of Economics) -- what Mankiw actually says is: "fiat money: money without intrinsic value that is used as money because of government decree" (emphasis mine) "Money without intrinsic value is called fiat money. A fiat is simply an order or decree, and fiat money is established as money by government degree..." http://books.google.com/books?id=3ojsWuqmorEC&pg=PA644&lpg=PA644&dq=%22For+example,+compare+the+paper+dollars+in+your+wallet%22&source=bl&ots=g6r-wIHsKy&sig=0xv57KXPGdU-asxodipmNBD7FLw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=qZ7UT8X4AZP02wXbrKGlDw&sqi=2&ved=0CE8Q6AEwAg http://books.google.com/books?id=3ojsWuqmorEC&pg=PA644&#... "It isn't mandated by law the value of any other law what the value of any fiat currency is." I meant that fiat money only has value (as opposed to... no value) because it is mandated by law -- you are required to accept it as payment of debt, to pay taxes using it, etc. Sure, what the value is in real terms is a market decision.