> It is a fundamental prerequisite that the currency have a backer for said currency to be used widely. Yes, that's a prerequisite for a currency to function a

> It is a fundamental prerequisite that the currency have a backer for said currency to be used widely. Yes, that's a prerequisite for a currency to function as it should, but I think you're suggesting that Bitcoin differs from paper money in that regard. It happens that people trust paper money, but this isn't because paper money has some kind of innate authority beyond public faith and trust. If a particular government chose to manipulate the currency they could destroy it, either quickly or slowly. > The essence of bitcoin is ephemeral with no control, no central authority and no recourse. I think you're exaggerating the role of "central authority". http://w3.newsmax.com/newsletters/uwr/images/transcript-img14.jpg http://w3.newsmax.com/newsletters/uwr/images/transcript-img1... To me, the only difference between Bitcoin and paper money is public familiarity.