> ability to fund shadow libraries without fear of censorship

Bitcoin is much worse than cash in that regard

who do you hand the cash to in order to fund a website?

Sending cash via snail mail to buy stuff online exists. While Anna's archive does not support it, it certainly exists.

Ok, but now you're not comparing bitcoin to cash but rather to cash+mail, which has many more tracking opportunities.

This is also forbidden by several post offices. In my country it's against the law to send money by mail.

sure except for all the reasons cash doesn’t work for this

That's why most shadow libraries are funded with cash.

What about Monero?

How would it be feasible for Anna's Archive to accept cash?

To be fair, the theory with the whole coin thing is solid, and I'd say it should count as something to be proud of even if in reality it gets tainted by speculative investments.

Yeah. I personally think the original bitcoin whitepaper is a work of genius. Balancing the soft game theory incentives with hard cryptography garuntees is really cool.

I'd love to see more systems exploring this combination approach. There is a saying about not being able to solve a social problem with technology. Bitcoin is the blueprint on how to do that.

Its everything that came after that point that is the problem.

You want to stop things happening after other things?

> There is a saying about not being able to solve a social problem with technology. Bitcoin is the blueprint on how to do that.

What problem did we solve with bitcoin?

The blockchain.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockchain

The blockchain isn't the problem. It's supposedly the solution.

The distributed double spend problem.

I'm not here to argue that its a useful problem to solve, just that the solution is ingenious, and i think the methods used potentially have applications to other problems.