[horsawlarway]

So we both agree - the ledger is "accurate" only in the sense that the ledger matches... (drumroll) the ledger.

Which is entirely true, and there are some useful properties to that, but the whole thing falls down the second you have a real dispute over the trade of goods for value (which I might remind you, outside of the pure speculation/gambling that occurs in bitcoin pricing, is the point of actually holding a currency).

So how do I go about safely spending these things? Oh - it turns out that still only works in the context of a central authority and the legal system they support.

[hirako2000]

the dispute concern is long solved. it happens every day with cash, but also with other form of payments. freight shows interesting practices. and, escrow is still an option.

Spending these things? I can show you how to hold securely some wallet with your own private keys (no custody), receive then "spend" these things for a few pennies per transactions and with the guarantee nobody will interfere with our exchange. from wherever you happen to reside. there is no central authority able to (practically) control many of the blockchain networks out there.

[horsawlarway]

> Spending these things? I can show you how to hold securely some wallet with your own private keys (no custody), receive then "spend" these things for a few pennies per transactions and with the guarantee nobody will interfere with our exchange.

Yes, and because no one can interfere in the exchange, no one can prevent either party from abusing the other, and no third party can later reconcile the dispute without an outside framework.

I find it pretty unbelievable how comfortable the crypto crowd is about just dismissing reconciliation, when it's literally some of the oldest history have, and one of the more important roles of a functioning government (we literally have 4 thousand year old stone tablets dealing with this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complaint_tablet_to_Ea-nasir)