Thanks for the links.
Gavin talks about a bill which doesn't force people to destroy it if they want to move the funds digitally. & this is a problem because the piece of paper can keep moving with no funds in it.
This idea solves that problem. By giving the user two choices:
1) They can continue to transact or save the piece of paper without verifying it or knowing how BTC works.
or
2) They can desrtoy it to get the private key & move the funds into a digital form.
The main idea here is that value is validated by the integrity and physical condition of the bill. And so, you can have different bill values to solve the change problem.
And now, we have successfully created totally unnecessary problems because of this.
How about we just stick to Bitcoin as a digital currency or an
Electronic Cash System as defined by Satoshi himself?
I am not sure whether this idea is really good or not. But it seems to me it is a step backward to be honest. Just when the world is doing away with notes and physical versions of fiat currencies, you have here pushing it forward as if it is the better way to use something which is the perfect currency to match a digital future. We have started to enter into a cashless society.
Cash is really good. It gives freedom. You don't need technology or wifi acces to validate.
I live in the farm & there is so much people who don't use technology or credit cards. They only use cash. Is easy and practical.
There are is a huge percentage of society who need cash.
The cool thing about this cash system is that the paper is the settlement. It doesn't need an institution to validate it. You can validate it by scanning the QR or getting the private key by destroying the bill. There are no third parties involved.
The only problem here is how to create the trust mechanism to manufacture it. So people are confident that the QR code displeyed in the bill is the one associated with the private key inside the bill.
At this point, I think cash still has a valuable role to play. We have way more to go as a digital world. As a matter of fact, there are still people who do not know how to use the very rudimentary versions of cellphones. But it does not mean that the future technologies will be the ones to stoop down and adjust to the old way of living. The old way of living is the one that has to do the catching up.
If someone is living with the barest of technologies, he/she better be using the existing fiat currency rather than get involved in a digital currency turned into a bill. That's just a hassle to him/her. If one does not even have a credit card, a smart phone, and a wifi access, I doubt if he/she has the capacity to validate whether a Bitcoin bill is legit or has balance or not.
Also, a bill that has to be destroyed every time it is used up will cost more to our mother nature than our existing fiat bills which could last up to a few years in usage.