And, of course, the idea that bitcoin changes the world so radically that no one has an army anymore is absurd.  But I think you&#x27;ve just touched on another reason why people react so strongly to bitcoin-related articles.<p>It&#x27;s like, bitcoin started out with a pretty good-sounding idea:  decentralized currency, like the old Gnutella network except for money!  hey I like it!<p>Then people start talking about it and the first next step is &quot;hey and bitcoin takes control over money and puts it into the hands of the PEOPLE&quot; except it doesn&#x27;t!  It doesn&#x27;t at all!  Control over the money supply, there&#x27;s at least some tenuous link between votes we regularly cast as citizens and the people making those decisions.  Decisions over bitcoin&#x27;s economics?  Better start coding, except no one will accept your patches to bump up the 21 million bitcoin supply...not so democratic.<p>Then the conversation turns to pretty goofy new-world-order stuff, like &quot;bitcoin will eliminate the need for nations to have standing armies!!&quot;  Except the reality is, look at how the bitcoin people themselves squabble like a bunch of old hens, in the face of what seem to be legitimate critiques.  <i>These</i> are the people leading the way to a new world order?  I don&#x27;t think so.<p>And then we look at the environmental costs, and that&#x27;s not good.  Or the deflationary economics of the system itself, and those aren&#x27;t good either.  Or how it seems a lot more like an elaborate ponzi scheme, and that&#x27;s not good either.<p>Basically, what bugs me about bitcoin is that legitimate critiques are <i>always</i> brushed off with really absurd replies.  Kinda kills the whole thing for me.