Now, Libra, that thing can fuck off!
That's not fair. If you're expecting governments to be open minded enough to tolerate Bitcoin, then why don't you do the same and allow other entities to create their own money? People blame governments for not tolerating anything other than their own currency, but a lot people here do the same. In a free market money should be able to compete.
I'm conflicted on this one. While it's probably healthy to maintain a reasonable distrust of governments, it doesn't necessarily mean we should place boundless trust in corporations either. Sure, they're free to do it, but I also believe we have a responsibility to warn potential users about the dangers of such a service (should it ever get off the drawing board).
Think of it this way. If any individual on this forum launched a centralised service similar to Libra, where they had total control over the funds and people started to put their personal wealth into it, some here would naturally question if it was a scam. Or they would question if the security was robust enough. Or ask what safeguards are in place to prevent the service itself interfering with their transactions. Why is it suddenly perfectly safe for a big-name company to do it and why should anyone trust them with their wealth?
It's worth pointing out that
Facebook have already demonstrated security weaknesses.
Governments force you to use their hot air fiat currencies, and alternatives such as Bitcoin and Libra counter that.
But would Libra really counter it? Considering that they need permission from governments to go live, I'm sure there will be many of the same restrictions as you'd be subject to in fiat currencies, which rather defeats the point of Libra being an alternative. There are also numerous privacy concerns. They already get a vast trove of information about their users via Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, so then add to that users' financial transactions and spending habits as well? It sounds like a recipe for disaster.