3 ms·
You're missing the point of an analogy, which is to compare something complex or less understood to something simpler and more known. The idea isn't to correctl
by fusiongyro 14y ago
You're missing the point of an analogy, which is to compare something complex or less understood to something simpler and more known. The idea isn't to correctly capture every detail, it's to highlight some relevant aspect. Krugman is acting as an essayist here, not a technical commentator. His analogy perfectly captures one of the central motivators of Bitcoin: privacy. These added details may increase the resolution, but they certainly aren't relevant to his argument, and neither is his argument unseated simply by adding them back in.
- tantalor 14y agoI fail to see how bitcoin transactions are more or less private than those in dollars. It does seem a lot easier to make private transactions with bitcoins. But anybody sufficiently motivated can achieve an arbitrary level of privacy with either, right?
- anologwintermut 14y agoBut not easily online and certainly not without tursting a third party. Bitcoin is not anonymous, its pseudonymous . It is,however, more anonymous than most online payment systems and unlike all but 1 or 2 academic proposals that offer real anonymity, it does't require you to trust someone not to run off with your money.