So? I don't see anything wrong with someone being anti-bitcoin and all his points seem salient. His points in this piece are well-considered and argued as well.
I would downvote you but I'm just going to register my disapproval of your sort of criticism, which seems empty and baseless.
Not only does this sound like Ad Hominem, but I also think you are taking that statement too literally... the very sentence it's contained in should give a clue as to where his sentiment lies on alternative currencies(emphasis mine):
> I want Bitcoin to die in a fire: this is a start, but it's not sufficient.
It may sound like ad hominem, but that would mean I was "responding to arguments by attacking a person's character". That said, I'm definitely making blaming statements, so it's fair you made the observation. I'm pretty sure cognitive dissonance isn't a character trait so much as it is a current state of thinking surrounding a given topic, which in this case is global finance. I've read Stross, and like his works, but I am attacking what he is saying (currently) about a given topic. I think it's also fair to point out he makes his own ad hominem arguments: "Bitcoin (is bad b/c) mining software is now being distributed as malware". I also think it's fair to say, when observing illogical remarks from an individual, that they may still be conflicted on the topic.
Huhwhat? Bitcoin is the most extreme capitalist thing approximately ever. It is by its very nature a mechanism for capitalism to work around democracy, both in the obvious sense of avoiding democratic laws against e.g. drug trade, and as a tool that makes e.g. political bribery a lot easier. Stross is not being at all inconsistent.
