My only point was on hard asset backing. That is where the comparison to QQ coins ends. The political and legal aspects are another issue. On that issue bitcoin still wins. Bitcoin will be legal where it can. In oppressive regimes that outlaw it it will serve as an underground alternative currency.
Neither the Euro nor the U.S. Dollar have hard asset backing, yet they are widely used. It doesn't even stop them from being used as a world reserve currency.
The advantage of both of these currencies is that the organizations which control the release of those currencies from the "central banks" have some self-interest in keeping the release of those currencies under control and not getting out of hand.
The big difference between them, the QQ coin, Linden dollars, and most other "fiat" currencies compared to Bitcoins is that Bitcoins have a mathematical formula that determines when additional coins are released. It happens at a fixed rate with Bitcoins and attempting to force that rate to change backfires due to the mathematics involved.
If anything, the QQ coin is another example to show how virtual money can have value in spite of the fact that it has no "hard backing" or anything other than its pure value, although in the case of the QQ coin it is pegged to the Yuan, sort of like how things such as
Ithaca Dollars are pegged to the U.S. Dollar.
What gives value to Bitcoins is that people are willing to trade for them and use them as a medium of exchange. That is sort of the point of having money.
