That's similar to Erik's one email protocol example, which as I said isn't the same applicably.

The truth is markets do prefer choice -- coke, pepsi, chevy, toyota. I actually think things will wind up being pegged to gold. That fits with Erik's one dominant currency belief, which I actually do agree with, but people will hold a portfolio of currencies just as more savvy money managers (read as the rich) hold money in different forms.

Money is complex. Gold is the most widely valued thing among the largest number of people. However, it's not transacted as money often, and can't achieve good network effect, because it's not convenient to transact. So things, like fiat currency, compete with gold and are used far more dominantly. That doesn't mean gold has lost all its monetary value, though.

I think we will see prices listed relative to gold, e.g. .0001 oz, for something, but merchants will accept a variety of things to equal that value, cryptocurrencies topping the list. Just as you can go to many sites and buy services with dollars or Liberty Reserve and increasingly bitcoins, all relative to USD, in the future we will see similar payment options but relative to gold. People will store the majority of their wealth in gold, but also hold a portfolio of whichever cryptocurrencies work for their situation. There may even be fund managers offering professional services.

So you do have access to everything, because it's so easy to trade for anything you need at any time. That's what you both seem to miss. As I point out richer people already hold and trade portfolios of different currencies. They don't have it backwards. Technology is simply expanding that access to a larger group of people.