petition: official currency code for Bitcoin (BTC?)

[Daniel Pocock]

On 17/11/12 19:25, Mike Dupont wrote:
> 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
> 

Microsoft or Apple could also start a p2p currency and deploy it to
every end user... I just hope the free software community agrees on some
solution before the big players do so.



> 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
>>
> 
> 
>