[AFAIK]

I know there is already a thread about Bitcoin but I wish to separate discussion of technical aspects of the currency from the political implications.
If you want to learn about how bitcoin functions please consult the thread linked below.

viewtopic.php?f=70&t=151139

Bitcoin is a very attractive proposition to me as it is independent of govt. and banks. Inflation is fixed and finite. Transactions are anonymous.

The political implications of this are promising;
People can evade economic warfare- Peer to peer transactions don't require banks.
People can evade prohibition- Online gambling for instance.
People can evade boycotts- Controversial organisations cannot be excluded.

Libertarians like this.
What do anarchists think?

[Nunt]

The political implications of this are promising;
People can evade economic warfare- Peer to peer transactions don't require banks.
People can evade prohibition- Online gambling for instance.
People can evade boycotts- Controversial organisations cannot be excluded.

Cash money also have these properties.

[AFAIK]

Peer 2 peer transfers over the internet are faster, cheaper and more secure than real world transactions.

[Fasces]

dlt

[Someone5]

I know there is already a thread about Bitcoin but I wish to separate discussion of technical aspects of the currency from the political implications.
If you want to learn about how bitcoin functions please consult the thread linked below.

viewtopic.php?f=70&t=151139

Bitcoin is a very attractive proposition to me as it is independent of govt. and banks. Inflation is fixed and finite. Transactions are anonymous.

The political implications of this are promising;
People can evade economic warfare- Peer to peer transactions don't require banks.
People can evade prohibition- Online gambling for instance.
People can evade boycotts- Controversial organisations cannot be excluded.

Libertarians like this.
What do anarchists think?

Except apparently bitcoin isn't actually immune from government prosecution, as was recently demonstrated by a seizure of bitcoins.

[Husky]

In case you didn't know, AFAIK. Happened almost two months ago.

Source

The US Department of Homeland Security seized a payment processing account Tuesday belonging to Mt. Gox, the largest international Bitcoin trader, claiming the monetary exchange service falsified financial documents.

The American government has previously made it clear that officials are watching Bitcoin, a decentralized economic currency that international regulators have not yet been able to control. Many of those who favor Bitcoin use Dwolla, an Iowa-based startup that allows customers to transfer their dollars into Bitcoins.

Unfortunately for those consumers, the Department of Homeland Security issued a warrant Tuesday effectively shutting down Dwolla’s ability to process Bitcoin payments, as reported by CNET. Whether because of the DHS’ charge of operating an “unlicensed money transmitting business,” the sudden timing of the allegations, or another reason, Dwolla and Mt. Gox officials have been reluctant to comment.

“In order not to compromise this ongoing investigation being conducted by ICE Homeland Security Investigations Baltimore, we cannot comment beyond the information in warrant, which was filed in the District of Maryland [Tuesday],” said Nicole Navas, a representative for US Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The warrant claims Mt. Gox CEO Mark Karpeles did not disclose he operated a financial transfer site when he opened a new bank account for the business. Money transmitting services, according to Gawker, are required to register with the Department of Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCen). Mt. Gox, which is involved in roughly 63 per cent of all Bitcoin purchases, has not done so.

AFP Photo / George Frey

Despite the technicalities skeptics are wondering if Bitcoin’s friction with the Treasury department is the cause of this recent scrutiny. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-New York) said the anonymity afforded by the service provided an “online form of money laundering” and campaigned for its downfall.

“Literally, it allows buyers and users to sell illegal drugs online, including heroin, cocaine, and meth, and users do sell by hiding their identity through a program that makes them virtually untraceable,” Schumer said during a 2011 news conference. “It’s a certifiable one-stop shop for illegal drugs that represents the most brazen attempt to peddle drugs online that we have ever seen. It’s more brazen than anything else by light years.”

Most notably, proponents have asserted that Bitcoin would be impermeable in instances where WikiLeaks, for example, saw its funding evaporate as the federal government pressured PayPal to cut off the whistleblower site’s support network. Bitcoin would be more resistant to a crackdown of that nature.

Jerry Brito, a scholar at the libertarian Mercatus Center at George Mason University, told the Washington Post Bitcoin could reduce the cost of financial services by pioneering new business formats.

“Bitcoin has the potential to be a boon to the economy and a boon to merchants,” he said, adding that it could “disrupt traditional payment networks that have not been innovative for a very long time.”

A blind governmental crackdown would only serve to push Bitcoin further underground, Brito argued.

“You can’t put the genie back into the bottle,” he continued. “I hate to say it, but the Bitcoin community needs to start lobbying. It needs to start educating policymakers, lobbyists and influencers about the pros of Bitcoin and the impossibility or the difficulty in getting rid of all the bad uses.”

[AFAIK]

Thanks for sharing that Husky. I had heard the news earlier.

Even if Bitcoin fails there will likely be other electronic forms of money in use. The concept is very attractive.

This site allows anyone to play poker online.

https://sealswithclubs.eu/

[Eran]

The concept is indeed very attractive.

The weak link is the exchanges within which bitcoins are exchanged for more conventional currencies.

These exchanges could (and apparently already are) viewed as gateways to hiding money from authorities. Authorities don't like that. And since those exchanges, by definition, use traditional money, they are vulnerable to government action.

As long as ordinary money is an essential part of your lifestyle/business model, you cannot avoid those exchanges.

[mum]

The exchanges are not necessarily required for using bitcoins.
They are needed only for a very short time if converting fiat into bitcoin. The biggest losers were people keeping bitcoins in the exchanges for trading/speculation, to easily transfer between fiat and BTC.

More and more businesses are accepting bitcoins as payment. As this becomes more widespread, the need for exchanges will become less.

One more point. Bitcoin is very new, like any market, failures will hurt some people but then create the obvious need for reputation and other protective measures to give consumers the confidence they need to use those services. All in good time.