Comment: That's a fallacy

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Peter Schiff makes more sense... (see in situ)

That's a fallacy

Bitcoin can't be the Myspace to a future currency's Facebook. Those are examples of competing end user systems. Bitcoin is more the equivalent to SMTP which is the standard that competing email clients use to let them all interact together. Both adhering to the SMTP standard protocol, all email clients (outlook, gmail, yahoo, aol, or linux's thunderbird) would still be subject to competition. Sure, there may be some future competing protocol war, like x56 modem wars, AM vs. FM, Beta vs. VHS or MAC vs. PC but those were taking place because of limitations in each competitor. Usually one had better quality while the other was more compact and user friendly. In the end, most of these wars allowed the loser to stay alive, just with a smaller market share. I can't see any overall shortcomings in this money transfer protocol and if there were any, it would most certainly get addressed on GitHub.

Besides, your argument that people would accept Chase's government-approved digital currency nearly cost me a new keyboard! And I'll bet I'm not the only one here.