I'm probably not the person to ask, because my "succinct to the point of sounding flippant, but offered completely honestly" answer is: a profoundly destructive social fiction whose time is well past. The notion and role of a medium of exchange are things on which I have ... divergent views.
It's a human invention we have collectively chosen to value more than the thing it was presumably created to serve — you know, "humanity". Any tool that becomes more important than the lives and well-being of the folks that tool was invented to benefit (that is: all of us [0]), I'd submit, needs some serious critical re-examination.
I'm not holding my breath on that happening any time soon, though.
Your question is a complete non-sequitur, anyway. It's entirely possible to create systems and stores of value that aren't as abusable, abusive, exploitable, exploited, and just generally bad (or at least less good) for the overwhelming majority of the monkeys involved in its circulation and use, as compared to "money".
[0] If your counter is that it doesn't have to serve all of us, then I'd say it was the wrong tool out the gate.
And my original response merely suggested that using the ethically compromised complexity deliberately introduced into one of the more obscure forms of "money" we have to justify the technical complexities and their attendant consequences in yet another is at best fallacious.
That is: "But CDOs" isn't materially responsive to "BTC is complicated."
It's a human invention we have collectively chosen to value more than the thing it was presumably created to serve — you know, "humanity". Any tool that becomes more important than the lives and well-being of the folks that tool was invented to benefit (that is: all of us [0]), I'd submit, needs some serious critical re-examination.
I'm not holding my breath on that happening any time soon, though.
Your question is a complete non-sequitur, anyway. It's entirely possible to create systems and stores of value that aren't as abusable, abusive, exploitable, exploited, and just generally bad (or at least less good) for the overwhelming majority of the monkeys involved in its circulation and use, as compared to "money".
[0] If your counter is that it doesn't have to serve all of us, then I'd say it was the wrong tool out the gate.