The internet was designed for sharing information. Bitcoin is bound to the internet, but as a currency must be scarce by design. Bitcoin lending with interest due is already common. Money, debt, and markets are a package deal.

There is much we don’t know, but don’t discount (hah! a financial term) what we do know.

Fine, but to use another analogy, it’s like pulling up a sapling because it’s not an oak tree yet. We have to start somewhere, and while I totally agree with you that we ultimately need a much more radical level of disruption, even to the extent of possibly not needing a financial component, the urgent priority right now seems to be to change the global financial system which is commodifying everything to assuage its debt-based hunger. The solutions may not be perfect but there are mistakes that have to be made, and learnt from as we go, before we can arrive at that meaningful change.

I’m not interested in how a currency is implemented. It’s money (abstract accounting) and all forms play the same role in exchanges of private property. The deeper question is how to get people involved with more democratic and relational economic systems which might not have a financial component at all. That’s the level of disruption we need to be aiming for if you expect any meaningful change.

Ok I can see you are not convinced that Bitcoin is going to change anything as you have decided that enough time has passed to prove it a failure; maybe you’re right. I personally think to fully disrupt the financial system which has been evolving for centuries more time is going to be needed. I agree that cryptocurrencies can be used in ‘the struggle for authority’ but like any other currency they can also be used for more positive ends as well – in a way it’s like asking ‘are knives good or bad?’. It depends what you use them for.

Mrs. Hayase gushes over the Bitcoin blockchain. Tell me Guy, how has this miraculous database changed the political reality that you experience?

You also ignored my last point. Personal sovereignty is not the goal; the struggle for authority is a winner take all game. That is the status quo and bitcoin only encourages that behavior.

As I pointed out, posting this overwhelmingly positive overview of Bitcoin is not intended as an uncritical acceptance of all it is saying, merely one more voice in the conversation about this subject (to which you have chosen to also add your own voice), and also while I accept your point that the volume of discussion is not necessarily an indicator of relevance, I would submit that it can be when those involved in the discussion have often – as in the case of the writer of this article – done a lot of research on the subject. Her point is that cryptocurrencies bring increased personal sovereignty one step closer to being a reality, you disagree, time will tell. I plan to keep an eye on the subject for the foreseeable future.

Here near the end of 2014 about 64% of total Bitcoins have been mined. If a Bitcoin revolution hasn’t happened yet, well, it’s probably not going to. There are more than 160 national currencies and over 500 crypto currencies now. What is the magic number for when ‘sovereignty’ is achieved?

Sovereignty (absolute authority) is what people fight over. I’d posit that we need a bit less of that and a bit more compassion, cooperation, and relational awareness. I’m not sure how demanding special tokens from people in exchange for personal property leads to that goal.