I don't hate Bitcoin. I think the facts speak for themselves, THE BITCOIN FOUNDATION, INC. is running Bitcoin now, Bitcoin is deeply linked to a United States corporation and Satoshi is a member of THE BITCOIN FOUNDATION, INC.

Some people will like this, others will dislike it and most won't care or even know. Exposing the truth is not fear mongering.

Lest we underestimate their irrelevance - from their archives four short months ago : "EXPIRED Bitcoin

At the height of its popularity, Bitcoin was trumpeted as a viable alternative currency for the internet age, a monetary system engineered to prevent theft, gaming, and criminalization. Then came the malware, the black market, the legal ambiguities and The Man. Today, you can't even use it to buy Facebook stock." http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/12/wired-tired-expired/?pid=4186

Many other Keynesian economists, Krugman for example, have done some research and have come to the same conclusions. The fact of the matter is that BTC doesn't fit into the Keynesian paradigm and therefore, by their accounts, BTC is bound to fail.

Any layperson reading this will more likely than not come away with a negative perception of BTC. It is remarkably unbalanced.
The fact that GA's counterarguments weren't incorporated makes this article yet another "hitpiece".

PS- On a positive note, it appears that >90% of bitcointalk.org-ers understand economics better that Wharton professors!

Others have turned to Bitcoins for privacy reasons, according to Wharton management professor Ethan Mollick. All Bitcoin transactions are anonymous and there are no centralized records of how many Bitcoins anyone has. That, says Mollick, has made Bitcoin attractive to people -- including drug dealers, online gamblers and others engaged in illegal activities -- who don't much like government tax collectors or the idea that "Big Brother" can track their transactions.

Beyond such niche users, Wharton marketing professor Eric T. Bradlow, who is also co-director of the Wharton Customer Analytics Initiative, argues that is it unclear exactly what market need Bitcoin is fulfilling or what problem it is solving. The current electronic payments system works effectively for the most part; making payments, getting cash or transferring money is relatively easy, Bradlow points out. While many merchants complain about high fees, as a practical matter few would have reason to use Bitcoin unless it became far more widespread.

Excellent video!!!

One thing went through my mind, though - mentioning current price, mt.gox, silkroad, 50btc per block, etc... will make this video look very very dated in years to come...

If the creator could make it more "universal", that would be great and timeless.

Does this count? (Timothy B. Lee, writing in Forbes)

"The first post I ever wrote about Bitcoin was in April 2011. At the time, the crytpocurrency had recently surpassed parity with the dollar. I declared it a bubble, predicting that it would never displace conventional currencies, and that therefore it could never achieve a stable value. Over the next two months, the value shot up to almost $32. Then it crashed, eventually hitting a low of $2 in late 2011.

This from the "experts" who said bitcoin would never reach parity with the dollar. 

At the risk of stepping on kiba's toes; article say 04-22 ?

They're clearly all wrong!