[randomThoughts9]

> Inequity doesn't mean much wrt Bitcoin IMO.

I'm sorry, but you can't brush that subject off with a single sentence. It's a huge problem. If you want a real currency, that is.

You might hope that the free market will fix this problem, but I have my doubts. The current whales don't have a real incentive to sell.

And if Bitcoin would reach its goal, we would have some new, anonymous and untouchable overlords that would make the feudal ones look like amateurs. No thanks.

[wyldfire]

> I'm sorry, but you can't brush that subject off with a single sentence. It's a huge problem.

Sorry, I suppose I should've been clearer. Inequity is a problem, but not for bitcoin. I meant that since it doesn't (and might never) represent overall wealth that it's not very interesting how some slice of the population holds it.

> If you want a real currency, that is.

I'm okay with Bitcoin being something unlike any previous currency. I'm okay with bitcoin only being used by rich people, only being used by poor people, only being used by technophiles, or only being used by technophobes.

> And if Bitcoin would reach its goal

I doubt there's any consensus on whatever goal that might be. Bitcoin [supporters] like the idea of adoption, but I don't think many would assume it would eliminate the use or need for fiat currencies.

> ... we would have some new, anonymous and untouchable overlords that would make the feudal ones look like amateurs. No thanks.

I don't know how we got here. There's never been a more enabling technology. If in this odd analogy the "serfs" decide they don't like bitcoin they can use some-other-coin-that-they-prefer.