Digital currency for rail fares?

[AlterEgo]

Yeah, that's how it works. Pound coins are made by the Royal Mint, whereas Bitcoins are made through a widely distributed process anyone can take part in - though once that's over (we're about 80% of the way through it), that'll be that and no more will ever be made.

So there can be no artificial inflation? Or deflation?

 

[takno]

Nothing. Bitcoin is far from the only game in town - as I noted above Ripple is used by banks for settlement purposes.

But, just like any other precious commodity, a Biscoin is only worth what people value it as. So your Biscoin won't be worth anything until people decide that it is.

Luckily the pool is full of suckers just now, so with just a little of the right kind marketing you'll be off and running.

 

[PermitToTravel]

So there can be no artificial inflation? Or deflation?

Correct, as there's no central bank - just like with gold

 

[AlterEgo]

Correct, as there's no central bank - just like with gold

Would a society which traded principally in untrackable gold be a good one?

Philosophical question to which I don’t profess to have an answer.

 

[PermitToTravel]

Nor I - there are advantages and disadvantages aplenty to the anonymity of Bitcoin, to its decentralisation, and to how it is entirely trust-free and immutable.

It basically tries to be an electronic version of cash - it takes advantage of us now having the technology to make electronic payments without banks or card issuers to coordinate it and take their cut. It is quite saddening that the desire for privacy has to be conflated with having something to hide

At any rate, to many people, it's a useful tool; and it would be very difficult indeed to stop the use of such currencies...

 

[whhistle]

I see the merit in Bitcoin but with a define amount of them, it's not really going to be a currency of the future.

It's more like a limited edition book... except it costs £17,000 or whatever for just one, and you can't do anything with it, like read it, or look at it (paintings), or drive it (old car), or live in it (a house), nor can you eat it (expensive food) or drink it (some old wine) ... nothing.

Sort of makes me think if you could own £20 million all in pound coins, surely the value of the £1 coin would go up as there wouldn't be that many around.
Then, look who just happens to have them all, and could sell them at a higher value than the original £1.

 

[AM9]

... Sort of makes me think if you could own £20 million all in pound coins, surely the value of the £1 coin would go up as there wouldn't be that many around.
Then, look who just happens to have them all, and could sell them at a higher value than the original £1.

Other than to collectors, 20million £1 cons are worth £20 million. There are nearly 1.7 billion £1 coins in circulation and a shortage of them just creates cash transaction difficulties, - it doesn't do anything to their absolute value.

 

[takno]

Nor I - there are advantages and disadvantages aplenty to the anonymity of Bitcoin, to its decentralisation, and to how it is entirely trust-free and immutable.

It basically tries to be an electronic version of cash - it takes advantage of us now having the technology to make electronic payments without banks or card issuers to coordinate it and take their cut. It is quite saddening that the desire for privacy has to be conflated with having something to hide

At any rate, to many people, it's a useful tool; and it would be very difficult indeed to stop the use of such currencies...

I suspect anybody who thinks crypto is untrackable and anonymous is in for a bit of a surprise if it ever gets popular enough to build tracking tools for. On the face of it it should be a great deal easier to track than cash. Outside of overtly criminal uses, I suspect the majority of the use of anonymity will be to attempt to evade taxes, which isn't a particularly noble pursuit in itself.

It's also wildly hilarious to suggest that the use of bitcoin eliminates the need for middle-men. If anything it will result in a huge rise in the use of middle-men, since compared to cash it inherently sticks a computer and a huge dose of non-visibility into the whole equation. Also, while most transactions can currently take place using a shared currency which is dominant in the local geography, crypto is likely to require people to constantly mess around and arbitrage between different coin. I never had any particular issue with banks as middle-men in the first place. It's not like they're even making all that much money on them.

Cryptocurrency advocacy largely exists at the intersection of people who kind of understand a bit about tech and people who read a book about economics once and thought it sounded awful.