[Using U.S. law as a convenient set of terms of art, not to be geocentric.]
The internet is a technical embodiment of the First Amendment (freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, right of peaceable assembly, right to complain about the government).
Bitcoin is a technical embodiment of some of the Fifth Amendment (due process -- protection against deprivation of property, and even life/liberty if you accept the unremarkable proposition that it's hard to live freely if you can't buy anything).
Having these technical protections in place are important regardless of their impact on or benefit to any one person.
> Bitcoin is a technical embodiment of some of the Fifth Amendment (due process -- protection against deprivation of property, ...)
How is it in any way different than having money in your bank account? If the government wants to, they can decide to take all your money from all your account, but they can also decide to throw you in jail until you hand over the keys to your Bitcoins. In the end there is no difference.
And if you want to have a discussion whether there are alternative ways to achieve specific valuable outcomes, count me out. This thread is about whether cryptocurrencies have any potential valuable outcomes besides the potential of lottery-style winnings for early adopters.
Sorry if I seemed hostile, but I couldn't find any better word than nonsense to describe what I presume you meant to invoke by "Technological Singularity". It's about as realistic and scientific as religious extremists telling us to repent and prepare for the Rapture.
Ah, but this unwillingness to consider "why couldn't we do this without crypto", leading to rejection of study of centuries of useful economic and monetary theory development, is precisely what predicates the failure of cryptocurrencies to achieve potentially valuable outcomes.
That's precisely why I bring it up. If a thing is a) valuable/useful and b) possible without cryptocurrencies, why has it not been done before? The fact that it has not, suggests that either a) or b) is false.
The internet is a technical embodiment of the First Amendment (freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, right of peaceable assembly, right to complain about the government).
Bitcoin is a technical embodiment of some of the Fifth Amendment (due process -- protection against deprivation of property, and even life/liberty if you accept the unremarkable proposition that it's hard to live freely if you can't buy anything).
Having these technical protections in place are important regardless of their impact on or benefit to any one person.