Bitcoin Forum

Bitcoin fans enjoy the freedom that the currency promises to provide. We like that no government or central authority controls it and that no other currency offers the same security and privacy. However, only people with the privilege of Internet access can possibly enjoy these benefits. The rest have no choice but to barter or stick with their governments’ currency. For governments so inclined, might the proliferation of bitcoin mean greater control over the technologically deficient poor? If so, how can we avoid or mitigate such an outcome? Should we even care?

We should look to help people of all wealth level so they can contribute to the strength of the bitcoin economy.

Patience

Bitcoin is not limited, in principle design, to only those with Internet access.  There has been much discussion on this forum over that topic.

if I have internet then I can provide you a bitcoin account at a fee if you trust me. Since internet is common the world over- even in the poorest countries, this is not a problem. Broadband is near universal. Go to any third world city and you'll find internet cafes everywhere.

The cost of Technology and Internet in particular is continue to drop. Soon everyone will have access and this will be a non issue.

Bitcoin is a backing currency. I know this is not commonly known and accepted yet, but it's what it is.

There is nothing that stops people from doing classical banking with Bitcoins. In fact, it is probably necessary, since the block chain is a slow high-maintenance system not really suitable for small transactions.

There's nothing wrong with printing Bitcoin bills. "100 mBTC, to be redeemed at the Malaysian Bitcoin Bank" -- good enough for use in the supermarket. But any larger savings can be stored on your own USB stick, enabling the security and stability of Bitcoin where it's needed. If Malaysia goes haywire, people only lose their shopping cash, and transferring savings out of the country is trivial.

That's the main point why Bitcoin is so great. It works when it matters, but doesn't stop anyone from using cheap, classical methods otherwise. In effect, this will move monetary control away from local governments and institutions, toward international companies and organizations anyone can use from anywhere.

In effect, this means there will be an abundance of choices for banking, and people are not forced to use the local ones. As long as some of them are suitable for non-techies, things will work out. Well, with the exception that uninformed people making stupid decisions are still at risk. But I don't think there's a way to change that.