petition: official currency code for Bitcoin (BTC?)

[Mike Dupont]

Interesting points here!
Well if the founders of BC might stand to gain alot on the adoption of
it, would it not make sense to create a FSFBT that the fsfe would
stand to gain from? could the fsfe not use the same software to use as
exchange?
just some random ideas.
mike

On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 12:19 PM, Sam Liddicott <sam at liddicott.com> wrote:
> Aye.
>
> I think there is little reason to suppose that a group of people (mostly)
> united in matters of software freedom would share a common view on bitcoin.
>
> I don't think it is the business of FSFE or FSF to make a comment on bitcoin
> but further getting a consensus among members may not be possible anyway.
>
> Sam
>
> On Nov 12, 2012 11:33 AM, "Daniel Pocock" <daniel at pocock.com.au> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/11/12 11:17, David Gerard wrote:
>>
>>
>> >> I don't want to belittle your point of view - it is always good to look
>> >> at any new inventions with a critical eye, especially when money is
>> >> involved.  But what do you see as safer alternatives to Bitcoin?
>> >
>> >
>> > This is the politician's fallacy:
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician%27s_syllogism "We must do
>> > something; This is something; Therefore, we must do this." Your
>> > question does not imply an answer of "FSFE must therefore lend its
>> > good name to Bitcoin."
>>
>>
>> Actually, I don't think that was my question at all.
>>
>> To put it in context, if you were making a new physical currency, you
>> could go to a chemist and ask him is it better to use silver or sodium.
>>  The chemist may well tell you that sodium is too soft for coins.  He
>> would likely go on to explain that it is highly reactive and likely to
>> explode in your pocket, while silver is durable and reacts with few
>> things.  A geologist may tell you that silver is rare, also making it a
>> good choice.  Neither the chemist or geologist is telling you to invest
>> your life savings in silver though, they are just giving scientific facts.
>>
>> In the same spirit, I think that organisations concerned with free
>> software do have some contribution to the debate, e.g. to answer
>> questions like whether it is better to have critical technology (e.g.
>> the payments system) built on transparency (open source and open
>> standards).  A further step may be to classify the qualities of such
>> systems to help people distinguish the better ones, just as a geologist
>> can tell you about the relative scarcity of gold vs silver, without
>> actually endorsing a particular financial model or giving anything that
>> could be perceived as investment advice.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discussion mailing list
>> Discussion at fsfeurope.org
>> https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discussion mailing list
> Discussion at fsfeurope.org
> https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
>



-- 
James Michael DuPont
Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org
Saving wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com
Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org
Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3
Free Software Foundation Europe Fellow http://fsfe.org/support/?h4ck3rm1k3