Paul Krugman wants to start a fake alien invasion to stimulate the economy.

When the virtual currency bitcoin was released, in January 2009, it appeared to be an interesting way for people to trade among themselves in a secure, low-cost, and private fashion. The Bitcoin network, designed by an unknown programmer with the handle "Satoshi ­Nakamoto," used a decentralized peer-to-peer system to verify transactions, which meant that people could exchange goods and services electronically, and anonymously, without having to rely on third parties like banks. Its medium of exchange, the bitcoin, was an invented currency that people could earn—or, in Bitcoin's jargon, "mine"—by lending their computers' resources to service the needs of the Bitcoin network. Once in existence, bitcoins could also be bought and sold for dollars or other currencies on online exchanges. The network seemed like a potentially useful supplement to existing monetary systems: it let people avoid the fees banks charge and take part in noncash transactions anonymously while still guaranteeing that transactions would be secure.

Yet over the past year and a half Bitcoin has become, for some, much more. Instead of a supplement to the dollar economy, it's been trumpeted as a competitor, and promoters have conjured visions of markets where bitcoins are a dominant medium of exchange. The hyperbole is out of proportion with the more mundane reality. Tens of thousands of bitcoins are traded each day (some for goods and services, others in exchange for other currencies), and several hundred businesses, mostly in the digital world, now take bitcoins as payment. That's good for a new monetary system, but it's not disruptive growth. Still, the excitement is perhaps predictable. Setting aside Bitcoin's cool factor—it might just as well have leapt off the pages of Neal ­Stephenson's cult science-fiction novel Snow Crash—a peer-to-peer electronic currency uncontrolled by central bankers or politicians is a perfect object for the anxieties and enthusiasms of those frightened by the threats of inflation and currency debasement, concerned about state power and the surveillance state, and fascinated with the possibilities created by distributed, decentralized systems.

Bitcoin is not going to make government-backed currencies obsolete. But while the system's virtues, such as anonymity and the lack of bank fees, may not matter much to most consumers, one can envision it being useful in a variety of niche markets (some legal, others not, like recreational drugs). Where anonymity is valuable, where trusted third parties are hard to find or charge high rates, and where persistently high inflation is a problem, it's possible that bitcoins could in fact flourish as an alternative currency.

(...)

So just now the bitcoin boom of the past year looks not so much like the birth of a new currency as like a classic bubble. And this has created a real paradox for bitcoin enthusiasts. The best thing for bitcoins would be for people to stop thinking of them as an investment and start thinking of them as a currency. That probably requires the bubble to burst, as it may be doing right now. But if the bubble bursts, it's possible that people's interest in Bitcoin will just fade away. After all, would you accept bitcoins in exchange for your work or products if you knew their value had fallen 50 percent in a matter of days? The challenge for Bitcoin now is whether, having become popular because of the cycle of hype, it can somehow avoid being devoured by it. Only then might we be able to say, Good-bye, asset; hello, currency.

Bruce,

I and several thousand other people, forum members or not, were very exited and looking forward to this bitcoin conference.
Mind you, bitcoin is the internet currency, so the "whole" internet was watching, or actually, not watching, because there was no live feed, no blog posts, no press release, no pictures, nothing.

I don't understand how you can make a bitcoin conference and lock out the whole world.
Yes, I heard some lame excuses about a broken laptop, and expensive internet connections.
This wouldn't even be an issue in some third world country, so I doubt that this could be an issue in the middle of NYC.

In hindsight this conference looks more like a secret meetup of some secret society.
The only thing that was leaked out of the conference is that there will be a few more conferences in the future.
Whoever will run this conferences, please don't be selfish - communicate about it, let the world know what is happening while it is happening.
Use this past conference outside communication as an example how it should not be done.

If you would have done the publicity that such a conference does deserve,
I am sure the exchange rate would have risen by at least 2 or 3 dollars,
instead of fallen by almost 1 dollar. Now how to you explain your family and friends that you have just wasted this big opportunity to solidify their bitcoin wealth by 25%.
Or do you no longer care, after the mybitcoin debacle?
Do you think that after loosing 49% one doesn't want to gain some 25%?

I think it is also a lost opportunity for OnlyOneTV. In the short period of time when there was some sort of live feed, there were more than thousand viewers. Numbers that you never had before. I can only imagine how much more thousand viewers only got the "off air" message, and remember your business now as OnlyOffAirTV. Bit lost opportunity, better don't tell your sponsors about this.

you are bound to get plenty of money

My 1.1G/hash miner uses 750W's and generates A LOT of heat. The bright side of running it is that when its mining bitcoin its gaining more then it costs to operate. Hence the heat is free (kinda). about 10 of these should keep any 1200 ft home worm any time of year.

~circle jerk~