Do you mean "currencies: gold and silver" or "currencies, gold, and silver"? Do you really believe it will replace traditional currencies? Do gold and silver have any real value (as in I can exchange them for good somewhere)?
I wonder because I've noticed that generally people who bet on bitcoin as "world money" seem to forget a few things: 1. the information infrastructure necessary for bitcoin is not universal and requires constant upkeep (thus a stable political and economic climate) and 2. there are currently many currencies and the world seems to get by with them. Is there reason to believe that bitcoin's adoption will be fostered by the necessary stable political climate and if it's enough of an improvement over paper monies to replace them entirely?
EDIT: I guess to summarize what now seems to be a confusing point: my dollar still work fine. What does bitcoin have that will motivate me to replace my dollars?
NOTE: I hold bitcoins and will continue to hold them. I buy webhosting and a few other things with them on a fairly regular basis.
National currencies, gold, silver and other commodities used to hedge against USD, EUR, banks etc.
Our whole global economy and lifestyle enjoyed by billions of people needs computers and electricity, otherwise we go back to middle ages.
People want one money - most liquid, most used one. Gold does not fly, USD is politically controlled and restricted. Bitcoin weights zero and unrestricted by design.
>Our whole global economy and lifestyle enjoyed by billions of people needs computers and electricity, otherwise we go back to middle ages.
Well, "whole" is a strong word here. I would try using bitcoin in Cuba. Or Russia. Or some parts of Montana. Good luck getting a wireless signal.
>People want one money
I'll need a citation for this. I think instability in the Eurozone has more or less turned this idea on its head. If people wanted one money, we would have one money. The fact that major economic players either never joined the Euro or now want out indicates to me that "one money" is not a universal desire.
I'm from Russia. There's internet even where the toilets are from 15 century full of shit. Half of Africa pays with mobile phones and lives in dirt.
It's logically easy to prove. Which money would you choose to store permanently? Bitcoin if it's accepted everywhere in the world, or EUR if it's only accepted in 20 countries? Who knows where you'll be next year, so it's better to store money in a more liquid currency. Bitcoin can be it because there are no fees or capital controls like in EUR or USD.
In Russia, in 1990s people were using dollars no problem. Until government went in with laws forcing people to put prices in roubles and other controls on flow of capital and cash.
You still need to be able to convert your BTC to a legal tender currency to pay wages, debts, and taxes. As long as that requirement exists, BTC will always be a secondary currency at best (and I'm not convinced it will ever be a currency in any meaningful way).
I wonder because I've noticed that generally people who bet on bitcoin as "world money" seem to forget a few things: 1. the information infrastructure necessary for bitcoin is not universal and requires constant upkeep (thus a stable political and economic climate) and 2. there are currently many currencies and the world seems to get by with them. Is there reason to believe that bitcoin's adoption will be fostered by the necessary stable political climate and if it's enough of an improvement over paper monies to replace them entirely?
EDIT: I guess to summarize what now seems to be a confusing point: my dollar still work fine. What does bitcoin have that will motivate me to replace my dollars?
NOTE: I hold bitcoins and will continue to hold them. I buy webhosting and a few other things with them on a fairly regular basis.