If they issue virtual coins, they wouldn't be fungible across borders. So effectively doing nothing but complementing their own physical coins. What benefit is that to the world? The point of bitcoin is that it works worldwide. One world, one currency.
Umm... primecoin and gridcoin both work worldwide.
The question was how to destroy bitcoin;
the answer is to replace it with something better while at the same time breaking bitcoin.
Isn't that the same thing?
If you replace it , nobody is using it so you can consider it dead.
Not really, I mean, people are still farming lite-coin and feather coin aren't they?
What purpose do those two coins serve other than its easier for non-ASIC users to mine; so they can trade them for bitcoin?
Similarly, even if something better than bitcoin comes out, people might still mine it in hopes of trading for that new currency.
As the question was how to
destroy bitcoin, you'll also have to destabilize the network to get people to move on.
Having 1000 separate accounts sending money to one other (different amounts) when you fork the network in several different countries would be a good start.Especially if you spend the money in your home country. Can you imagine the confusion and anger the merchants would have when their payment is unconfirmed/never existed since the block chain it happened on happened to be shorter than the longest chain?
Well , you lost me there.
I'm too tired to try to understand what you're trying to say with that.
I'll give it a try with a nice cup of coffee before me in the morning.
Sorry about that. I'm tired too, so I'm probably rambling.
Referencing my thoughts several posts ago, one of the methods used in destroying bitcoins involved manipulating the internet links between countries.
By separating the bitcoin network, you can create a fork in the blockchain.
However, each "forked" blockchain has a copy of the historical transactions that occurred before it got forked.
So you, as an entity out to destroy bitcoin, have several addresses with a few BTC each in them.
You then split the network.
During the time of the split, your addresses spend, transfer, do many transactions - etc, with each other and various merchants.
However, your addresses do this in more than one "forked" location, and each "forked" location will have different transactions.
You let your transactions confirm, then remove the disturbance.
Now, you have several different blockchains of various lengths, with many different transactions competing to be the real blockchain.
No matter which one wins, transactions on the losing blockchain will not be reflected - hence everyone on the losing blockchain will be upset.
Especially if they take a monetary lost. (The reason for having many accounts enacting transactions is to prevent any easy manual repair/syncing - hence all the transactions taken in each "forked" blockchain must be different)