In lite of contempo events within the bitcoin manufacture, namely the Evolution Market going up in a burst of flames with customer money, it has become clear that cryptocurrency deviates from traditional money in more means than initially run into the eye.

Bitcoin, among a slate of other cryptocurrencies, violates the principle of fungibility within money - that is, each money'due south transaction history differentiates them from every other bitcoin in apportionment. With the collapse of the subconscious Evolution Market, these coins have now been tainted, and services are wilfully denying their deposit into wallets held by exchange businesses.

Bitcoin fungibility has been called into question and it is condign glaringly obvious that this poses a threat to the stability and long-term usage of such currency. Exchanges want nothing to do with these stolen funds, and therefore, lessen their value in relation to otherwise identical cryptocurrency units.

"Fungibility is the belongings of a good or a article whose private units are capable of mutual substitution. That is, it is the property of essences or appurtenances which are capable of being substituted in place of 1 some other."

- Merriam-Webster

Cryptocurrencies such as DASH (formerly darkcoin) have come onto the scene with promises of anonymizing transactions by blueprint, something which is non implemented in the core of Bitcoin.

Dash has since seen a dramatic rise in value since the plummet of the Evolution Marketplace and could proceed to gain traction as users discover the importance of relatively-untraceable transfers. Even so, what is condign more than apparent, is that Dash holds a competitive advantage over bitcoin in the very brand-up of its monetary characteristic - that of improved fungibility among its coins.

-- Dash has gained momentum following the collapse of Evolution Marketplace

Is bitcoin maybe too traceable? Does the anonymizing function of Nuance and futurity cryptocurrencies pose a grave threat for the current male monarch of cybermoney?

One could perhaps make the argument that this blazon of transaction history surveillance volition only intensify with bitcoin similarly to how closely watched an individual's social media action is today. Is it reasonable to believe that, eventually, all transactions will be 'forensically deemed' for?

As nosotros move forrard, wait for blockchain applications, which map the relationship (and the identities) behind digital money, something where Dash and other cryptocurrencies propose to be the 'Tor' of digital money.

Fourth dimension will tell all, but it remains self-evident that bitcoin violates the principle of fungibility in a way which is structurally different from whatsoever grade of money we have seen to date.

Did you lot bask this commodity? You lot may also exist interested in reading these ones:

  • Darkcoin is Now Dash, and Non a Moment Besides Presently
  • DarkCoin Introduces Trustless Instant Payment Confirmations
  • Op-Ed: A Business Case for Privacy in a Crypto Economy