On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 15:30:02 Hamish Moffatt wrote: > The only thing of value in that article is the comments, which are a lot more > sceptical than the article itself.
One of those comments states: > For bitcoin to be considered a currency it needs to achieve three key uses: > store of value, unit of account and medium of exchange. > > So far it's just the last one and even then primarily just criminals, > including money laundering. I think he's right about open crypto-currencies, which are really bartering tools. If too much (and unknown) value is locked up in them outside the control of national governments, hard currencies will begin to suffer. Bitcoin could become another significant tax-haven, though legal enforcement of contracts might be difficult. A Wikipedia article reports two countries which have adopted the technology, presumably at a treasury level, not in the marketplace: - e-Dinar, Tunisia's national currency, was the first state currency using blockchain technology. - eCFA is Senegal's blockchain-based national digital currency. It's interesting stuff, especially the mathematics... David L. _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
