While this is being passed around in the cryptoverse let me just write a short note how the "most highlighted" part of Taleb's bitcoin pamphlet is critically, fundamentally wrong. 
The core claim, that bitcoin fulfills a need because it is "owned by the crowd", is a treacherous foreshortening of the simple fact that "the crowd that owns" ≠ "the crowd that controls" ≠ "the crowd that is affected". (Add "≠ the crowd that profits" if you wish.)
Crowd ownership itself solves nothing (nevermind that bitcoin is not actually "crowd owned"). Absentee ownership, stock corporations, even "workers owning the means of production" (read: Capital) were at different times invoked to disperse ownership and control.
Accounting exists to account for own vs control misalignments. Accounting has to heed public standards in order to safeguard the affected public. It does it adequately in a world where the sheer level of complexity leads to intransparency and unpredictability.
If it doesn't, and that happens quite frequently, we get headlines like "Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks." There is no such thing as a governance system that "solves" things. The best we can hope for is that it avoids catastrophic failure. The drunk unicyclist.
All of this in the face of all evidence that bitcoin's strongest suit, and its original promise, is as an accounting system, as a means to efficiently log payment flows. Bitcoin ownership = tangled mess. Bitcoin accountancy = promising lab experiment.
