On 17/11/12 19:25, Mike Dupont wrote: > Interesting points here! > Well if the founders of BC might stand to gain alot on the adoption of > it, would it not make sense to create a FSFBT that the fsfe would > stand to gain from? could the fsfe not use the same software to use as > exchange? > just some random ideas. > mike >
Microsoft or Apple could also start a p2p currency and deploy it to every end user... I just hope the free software community agrees on some solution before the big players do so. > On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 12:19 PM, Sam Liddicott <[email protected]> wrote: >> Aye. >> >> I think there is little reason to suppose that a group of people (mostly) >> united in matters of software freedom would share a common view on bitcoin. >> >> I don't think it is the business of FSFE or FSF to make a comment on bitcoin >> but further getting a consensus among members may not be possible anyway. >> >> Sam >> >> On Nov 12, 2012 11:33 AM, "Daniel Pocock" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On 12/11/12 11:17, David Gerard wrote: >>> >>> >>>>> 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." >>> >>> >>> Actually, I don't think that was my question at all. >>> >>> To put it in context, if you were making a new physical currency, you >>> could go to a chemist and ask him is it better to use silver or sodium. >>> The chemist may well tell you that sodium is too soft for coins. He >>> would likely go on to explain that it is highly reactive and likely to >>> explode in your pocket, while silver is durable and reacts with few >>> things. A geologist may tell you that silver is rare, also making it a >>> good choice. Neither the chemist or geologist is telling you to invest >>> your life savings in silver though, they are just giving scientific facts. >>> >>> In the same spirit, I think that organisations concerned with free >>> software do have some contribution to the debate, e.g. to answer >>> questions like whether it is better to have critical technology (e.g. >>> the payments system) built on transparency (open source and open >>> standards). A further step may be to classify the qualities of such >>> systems to help people distinguish the better ones, just as a geologist >>> can tell you about the relative scarcity of gold vs silver, without >>> actually endorsing a particular financial model or giving anything that >>> could be perceived as investment advice. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discussion mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discussion mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion >> > > > _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
