<p>There are "digital bearer certificate" systems, which are an older concept.  They require a centralized issuer in order to prevent double-spending.  You can think of the certificates as electronic IOUs for a commodity (such as gold) held by the issuer.</p>

<p>Some DBC systems implement <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_signature">Chaumian blinding</a> to anonymize transactions.</p>

<p><a href="https://github.com/FellowTraveler/Open-Transactions/wiki">Open Transactions</a> is a recent DBC system that has gained some interest.  It could be used with Bitcoin as a backing commodity, taking advantage of the properties of both systems.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-08-31T02:40:58.867Z
2011-08-31T02:40:58.867Z
xyz
<p>(answering the original question, before the edit)</p>

<p>I suppose it depends on what specific characteristics matter to you.  There are plenty of examples of non-government "money."  WoW gold, Linden dollars (Second Life money), and Chuck E. Cheese tokens all count as money in some sense.</p>

<p>I don't think any of those examples truly count as "open source money" though.  Perhaps the main problem in developing such a money before Bitcoin was how to trust that transactions are legitimate.  Typically this would require some sort of trusted 3rd party (so if I believe in Linden dollars gold then I trust Linden to be honest and not to get hacked).  Some mechanism needs to be in place to prevent me from altering the balance in my digital account or from making copies of my money files.  Trusted 3rd parties can indeed do this, but I don't think that is in the spirit of "open source money."  The block chain concept is the only open-source mechanism I know of to prevent double spending without relying on trusted 3rd parties.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-05-03T09:04:41.197Z
-1 He explicitly said "decentralised", so no, all those moneys don't count.
o0'.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-05-06T04:33:44.490Z
@Lohoris The "decentralized" part was only added to the question a year and a half after I answered...and by someone besides the original asker!  I answered the original question as it was asked...
Michael McGowan
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-05-06T08:58:14.883Z
Oh, sorry, I totally didn't notice!
o0'.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-08-31T02:30:32.803Z
2013-05-06T08:58:40.570Z
2013-05-06T08:58:40.570Z
Michael McGowan
<p>Yes, there are other alternatives to Bitcoin with overall different approach but with different results such as zCoin, Monero, ... which provides more privacy</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-12-27T19:50:08.307Z
2016-12-27T19:50:08.307Z
user44543
<p>Are there any alternative approaches to <strong>decentralized</strong>, electronic currencies?</p>

<p>Bitcoin was built with certain technical characteristics in mind. I'm hoping to see if there are alternative approaches. I don't mean things like Namecoin or other adaptations of the blockchain concept.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-08-31T03:58:19.217Z
Can you be more specific?  What problem are you trying to solve?  Bitcoins offer many features: transactional uses, investment potential, flexible transaction possibilities via scripts, pseudonymity, decentralization etc.  Different alternatives are available for each.  The term "open source money" is not clear.
nealmcb
CC BY-SA 3.0
2011-08-31T04:39:32.020Z
It is best when a question has a clear answer, so when there are different requirements, they should each have their own question.
nealmcb
<alternatives>
Are there alternatives to Bitcoin which take a different approach?
Andrei Railean
# Are there alternatives to Bitcoin which take a different approach?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2011-08-31)

Are there any alternative approaches to **decentralized**, electronic currencies?

Bitcoin was built with certain technical characteristics in mind. I'm hoping to see if there are alternative approaches. I don't mean things like Namecoin or other adaptations of the blockchain concept.

**Tags:** alternatives

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Can you be more specific?  What problem are you trying to solve?  Bitcoins offer many features: transactional uses, investment potential, flexible transaction possibilities via scripts, pseudonymity, decentralization etc.  Different alternatives are available for each.  The term "open source money" is not clear.  
> **username_1**: It is best when a question has a clear answer, so when there are different requirements, they should each have their own question.  

---

## 3 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2011-08-31. Score: 6

There are "digital bearer certificate" systems, which are an older concept. They require a centralized issuer in order to prevent double-spending. You can think of the certificates as electronic IOUs for a commodity (such as gold) held by the issuer.

Some DBC systems implement [Chaumian blinding](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_signature) to anonymize transactions.

[Open Transactions](https://github.com/FellowTraveler/Open-Transactions/wiki) is a recent DBC system that has gained some interest. It could be used with Bitcoin as a backing commodity, taking advantage of the properties of both systems.


---

### Answer by username_3 on 2011-08-31. Score: 4

(answering the original question, before the edit)

I suppose it depends on what specific characteristics matter to you. There are plenty of examples of non-government "money." WoW gold, Linden dollars (Second Life money), and Chuck E. Cheese tokens all count as money in some sense.

I don't think any of those examples truly count as "open source money" though. Perhaps the main problem in developing such a money before Bitcoin was how to trust that transactions are legitimate. Typically this would require some sort of trusted 3rd party (so if I believe in Linden dollars gold then I trust Linden to be honest and not to get hacked). Some mechanism needs to be in place to prevent me from altering the balance in my digital account or from making copies of my money files. Trusted 3rd parties can indeed do this, but I don't think that is in the spirit of "open source money." The block chain concept is the only open-source mechanism I know of to prevent double spending without relying on trusted 3rd parties.

> **Comments:**
> **username_4**: -1 He explicitly said "decentralised", so no, all those moneys don't count.  
> **username_3**: @Lohoris The "decentralized" part was only added to the question a year and a half after I answered...and by someone besides the original asker!  I answered the original question as it was asked...  
> **username_4**: Oh, sorry, I totally didn't notice!  

---

### Answer by username_5 on 2016-12-27. Score: -2

Yes, there are other alternatives to Bitcoin with overall different approach but with different results such as zCoin, Monero, ... which provides more privacy


---

