I have been following this discussion with interest because I bought a bitcoin. As best as I can tell, the personal wallet that contains my coin is located at and is under the control of an exchange, such as MtGov. This is no different from the money in my account at the bank. If the exchange goes bust, as apparently is happening with MtGov, I lose my coin. If the bank goes bust, I would lose my money unless the government steps in to replace it.
In both cases, the money is in digital form and can be transferred using the computer. The only difference is that transfer of bitcoins is outside of the normal system. In addition, when I transfer a dollar, a dollar gets moved. When I transfer a bitcoin, the dollar amount is variable depend on which day I make the transfer. As for a EMP event, that would wipe out the money in my bank because all record of its existence would be lost, unless the paper record was accepted. Of course, I have a paper record of my bitcoin as well, which may or may not be accepted. So, as for safety of money, it seems we are at the mercy of the location where the money is stored. That is why the mattress is looking better all the time. Ed Storms On Feb 26, 2014, at 9:41 AM, James Bowery wrote: > Alain, what you are talking about are what I previously called the "exchange" > layer of cryptocurrency infrastructure. > > That layer of the infrastructure is not necessary. > > Cryptocurrency differs from gold in that the safest place to keep it is not > in a central location but in your own electronic wallet which is part of the > highy vetted electronic-wire/public ledger infrastructure. Yes there are, > and always will be, a lot of people offering "financial services" of all > kinds -- what I'm subsuming under my term "exchanges" -- and I expect as > things progress much of this infrastructure will be absorbed by the current > financial institutions that offer services of proven value. But the basis is > actually better than gold in the absence of an EMP event. > > > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 6:28 AM, Alain Sepeda <alain.sep...@gmail.com> wrote: > many interesting points. > Bitcoin interesrt beside being anonymous like coins and bills. > Some people like libertarians and gold lovers loke bitcoins because they > think the quantity of physicical bitcons, like gold (but more predictably > than gold) cannot be fudged by central banks. > > In fact it is false, like for gold. > like there is tons of paper-gold, ther will be (or there is) ton sof > paper-bitcoind... > banks can invent bitcoins by makein loans (the basic of monetary creation).. > > in some US prisons, since cigarettes get banned, the currency is fishcans... > > using shells is no better than gold, bitcoins, or banknotes... as soon at it > is trusted, some actor may make loan, based on deposits, or sell insurance > contractes (derivated products)... > > best way is to understand what is finance, and prevent too-big-to-fail, and > people with no flesh in the game... > > > > 2014-02-26 7:58 GMT+01:00 Giovanni Santostasi <gsantost...@gmail.com>: > > It is not possible. Bitcoin network itself is not hackable as credit cards > are. The vulnerabilities are in centralized places like exchanges that do not > take precautions to protect customers accounts (as cold wallets). A network > is very resistant to attacks like this. Look what is happening to Bitcoin, > even a disastrous event like what happened with MtGox created some turmoil > but not the end of Bitcoin. In fact price is bouncing back. > Bitcoin is going to be the future of money. > > > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Giovanni Santostasi <gsantost...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Bitcoin will be 1 Million dollars by 2019. > > Until a 16-year-old Russian Hacker gets into the bank, the way one got into > the Target credit files. A week after that, the Bitcoin will be worth $14.38. > > - Jed > > > >
