Is your argument that there is no first mover advantage, thus a competing P2P currency can be created at any time to fix any design flaw that handed control to corporate monopoly?
As I explained in my prior post, I would not agree. You would have to address my prior post and show me why I am wrong about the first mover advantage.
I don't say you are wrong about the first mover advantage. In my concept there are no fees, no way to identify approved/non-approved users, 51% attack becomes 99.999% attack for paranoic users, transactions are handled
outside the system, scalability is not an issue... Just interesting if my concept looks non-diabolical from your point of view.
Readers please note he is not disagreeing with me whether Bitcoin has the problem I allege.