The biggest argument against Bitcoin - and all crypto currencies for that matter - is that everyone thinks everyone else is out to rip them off in one way shape or form. It's sad but when you can't trust anyone, how far can it go?
To use Bitcoin trust is unnecessary. Consensus is necessary. As with trading anything, all parties involved must agree with the value of the item being exchanged. Fiat is backed by trust in the issuing authority. Even transactional trust is unnecessary if you use escrow.
At some point though you would have to trust somebody (maybe not in a financial way), at least in order to be able to feel fully at ease with someone (or anyone). Trust is a great issue with the Bitcoin community, but I believe it already has improved and is improving further, so it is not a long-term issue.
I'm not a programmer, so to some extent I have to trust that those who program my client aren't hiding a backdoor. If you're not part of the US Federal Reserve or related monetary industry, you have to trust that they will continue to accept such paper for taxes and legal debts. Faith in some group or another is a reasonable expectation. Bitcoin shines in that it doesn't require faith in any particular institution, nor is would the Bitcoin economy at large be at risk if (for example) the Bitcoin Foundation were to simply close up shop.
I agree. But I was talking about trust in the community in general. That most people have to be able to trust at least someone to be able to feel safe. For many people, family means great trust. For other people, it is certain friends. In less unequal societies people trust strangers less than in more equal societies. This has good and bad implications. Bad implications because it makes people naĩve, but good because it is a lot less hassle.
