Quote from: stompix on January 28, 2020, 01:49:01 PM

Quote from: HabBear on January 27, 2020, 05:32:09 PM

What concerns me though, is that as we stand on the edge of global acceptance of cryptocurrencies we risk the definition of cryptocurrency being violated by the corporate or government sponsorship needed to drive that global acceptance.

Unfortunately, no matter how you try to twist words if it will ever be released Libra will be a cryptocurrency and we're going to have to live with it. But, do you think a government would play around with words if it wants to drive up acceptance and not with laws? A government (of course in some countries it would be the parliament) could simply impose its currency with a law and that's it, the crypto dollar or the e-euro are official currency and legal tender and everything else.

Quote from: cabron on January 27, 2020, 06:57:21 PM

When the world is offered with convenience, they will forget about BTC for they will get used to what is offered by Libra.

Sad but true, people will not care about decentralization if the transactions are faster and cheaper and if you forget your private key you have someone to call and recover your wallet.

Quote from: Artemis3 on January 27, 2020, 05:55:22 PM

You see Bitcoin doesn't care if the politicians approve it, therefore is more valuable.

I've seen how much value and faith was put in it when single fake news about a government banning it made it lose half of its value.
What do you think the price would be tomorrow if the US congress outlaws cryptocurrency trade, mining, and ownership?

Does that mean the existence of coins like Libra will disturb the existence of (decentralized) cryptocurrency? In other words, whether the existence of a coin like Libra will make cryptocurrency holders will mutate from (decentralized) cryptocurrency to a centralized digital currency?