Your example of the police department is actually a reason why so many people are looking at crypto. Current fiat while being a means of exchange is also a method of enforcing government control. The governments enforcers of state sponsored violence are now allowing you to pay their arbitrary fines via a method that directly connects to your identity. At the same time the IRS is now requiring that centralized banks report all transactions of greater than $600 to them. This will allow them to more efficiently tax the poor and middle class, the rich probably dont care about $600. Get pulled over with a large amount of cash in the car and the police and seize it and then you have to engage in a costly legal battle to get it back by proving to them that you are not a criminal. That's if you can even afford an attorney. Today's centralized system is very much about enforcing government control over the individual on every level. For some crypto is just a last gasp at trying to get some control back and the pitfalls and complications are worth it.

100% agree. It's very hard for people of privilege who never had a negative interaction with the government to get this!

> Today's centralized system is very much about enforcing government control over the individual on every level.

You're totally right. So now explain to me in this crypto libertarian fantasy world how:

- People agree where internet cable lines get installed

- People agree on how roads should be laid out and

- People agree on who is going to bear arms and defend their sovereignty

Does a blockchain solve all of that?

Nope, but why would it? Does Signal solve this or Slack or AWS? I never indicated that it does, its just software. It addresses a specific set of problems or use cases as does all software. Crypto just attempts to claw back a limited subset of privacy. Trying to make it seem like it does or does not do more seems very agenda driven and both sides of the debate are rife with talking heads promising doom and salvation.

> It addresses a specific set of problems or use cases as does all software. Crypto just attempts to claw back a limited subset of privacy.

And it's just that - an attempt. If it makes you feel better that you feel like your thwarting the government then have at it.

> I never indicated that it does

Unless Crypto is widely adopted, then it doesn't solve any of the aforementioned things you mentioned.

> the pitfalls and complications are worth it.

They might seem like their worth it, until you realize you can't gain any of the benefits you mentioned without having solutions for the discussion of "who is going to pay for this bridge".

The fact that crypto advocates don't think of any of these logistics is what makes me not take any of your arguments seriously.

>Here's the problem - if I can't get my weather alerts from my local city township from Mastadon, but have to use Twitter, then the point is moot. For example - https://twitter.com/TravisCountyTX/status/148934948869109350...

It's still better than if it was completely impossible to communicate to others without twitter.

Or in other words,one of the fundamental properties of money is actually being able to spend it.

Precisely. A concept called "medium of exchange".