If Bitcoin is that fragile and vulnerable to attack, what are we doing anyway and why is it so consistently being defended?
Exactly. I feel the same way. Survival of the fittest. If bitcoin has some fundamental flaw, it will not be able to survive a government attack. Then it is better to weed it out now, so we aren't wasting our time promoting something that will not work, and can instead devote our resources and time to other efforts that hopefully will work and to other currencies to build up the alternative economy.
This is also about doing what is right, and this is the right thing to do. I get the arguments advocating caution, but sometimes you also have to take a stand on an issue too. There is a down side, and talking about concerns over that perhaps is useful.
Your stand could impact
my money, and everyone else's. Don't pretend your actions could impact only you.
I have spent many hours reading through the bitcoin forums about its robustness and resiliency to attacks...asking so many questions "What if the government does X?", and I have come to the conclusion that basically, bitcoin can't be shut down absent shutting down the internet. But the government wouldn't likely not shut down the internet, since they depend on tax revenue for their operations. If bitcoin has some flaw, then we need to resolve it now.
I approve of this message. If Bitcoin blows up, a new system can be build without this flaw. The probability of Bitcoin _not_ containing some fatal flaw is pretty small (as almost all software has flaws).
All Wikileaks needs to do is say "Following the PayPal incident we have decided to accept a new kind of payment, Bitcoins. You can find more information on donating via Bitcoins on URL . "
They could post it in their news section or something like that. It is possible that main stream media would pick it up if they would contrast Bitcoin with PayPal like that.