Great, thought provoking article!
" In my opinion, gold and silver, should be physical money and a crypto-currency should attempt to peg to gold and silver"
However a crypto-currency could perform the same role if it got large enough and probably better than gold or silver as they're easy to manipulate in practice & disguise claimed vs. real gold holdings whereas crypto-currencies allow for complete, constant accounting transparency.
We also have the problem that over time BitAssets would result in the under-pricing of gold as they are not backed by the actual thing but a representation of it, so we would potentially have the same negative effect as the Comex on a large scale. Hence my preference for a crypto-currency who's supply curve or lack thereof can't be manipulated by man as an ambitious goal of a better currency for mankind that can be used throughout the universe.
The Schelling dollar thingy
I only know about it from your brief description but part of the Schelling dollar approach seems to be like BitAssets where price feeds are replaced by a prediction market. You say -
"From an economic point of view are people really any better or worse off if they have 100 tokens worth $1 or 1 token worth $100? If you are going to uniformly issue or revoke tokens to maintain price parity then we haven’t really solved anything other than saving merchants the hassle of changing their prices."
Isn't that what our system does?
BitUSD maintains parity by issuing or in future also revoking tokens determined by competition around a centralised feed whereas another approach could do it via a decentralised prediction market that viewed supply and demand levels around a peg & adjusted interest rates to maintain parity. The downside is it might not be as stable imo. They would also need to keep the high level of collateral we have to make it as secure. It also seems they want to offer unlimited exchange which is not doable because of the unlimited conversion issue you described.