On 12 November 2012 10:08, Daniel Pocock <[email protected]> wrote:
> Actually, as a long term investment, it could be argued that anything is > a pump-and-dump scam. This is the fallacy of argument from worse consequences. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_as_bad_as > However, if you put aside the `investment' arguments and look at it as a > means of payment, how does it stack up? In the long run, is it better > to pay 6-7% in a combination of fees and exchange rate commission when > using a credit card for foreign currency purchases, or is it better to > use something like Bitcoin? It's certainly true that we could do with a means of funds transfer that isn't subject to the skimming and interference of the credit card companies and PayPal. Rick Falkvinge has written a bit on why he likes BitCoin for this purpose, and what its problems are; those interested in the topic should read: http://falkvinge.net/2011/05/29/why-im-putting-all-my-savings-into-bitcoin/ http://falkvinge.net/2011/06/04/bitcoins-four-hurdles-part-one-usability/ (and parts two, three and four) > I don't want to belittle your point of view - it is always good to look > at any new inventions with a critical eye, especially when money is > involved. But what do you see as safer alternatives to Bitcoin? This is the politician's fallacy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician%27s_syllogism "We must do something; This is something; Therefore, we must do this." Your question does not imply an answer of "FSFE must therefore lend its good name to Bitcoin." - d. _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
