Well-said.

You know, you're right.  I forgot about this.  And the low barriers to entry are yet another great asset of Bitcoin.  In fact, Bitcoin lowers barriers for *all* trade, but just those interested in Bitcoin-related business.  An all-around win.  And yes, some 18-year-old Bangladeshi with a $150 netbook could kick all of our asses on this and become the next Bill Gates.  Unlikely, but entirely doable.  It will be an interesting year, that's for sure.

Might be a good idea.

Then, thank you.  I wasn't referring to people like you, in fact, I thanked you in my original post.  And yes, if you're spending Bitcoins on what you need and holding on to the rest, I'd call what you're doing "saving" and not "hoarding".  In short, I agree with everything you said.

His client is clearly either himself or a family member (his wife?).  Is it considered ethical for attorneys to represent close family members?  It's a big no-no for physicians and other health care professionals (except in emergencies) and can result in professional censure.

I completely agree with your analysis.  Forget all the immediate issues, a good skeptic *should* ask ""is the underlying technology/protocol of Bitcoin sound?"  However, I think an even better skeptic would ask the question "are the people around Bitcoin sound?"  The best technology in the world can fail if it's surrounded and promoted by the wrong people, and the worst technology can succeed if an organizational and marketing genius is behind it (viz., Microsoft).  Well, the devs seem very sound, although sometimes it's not clear to me if they realize they enormity of their task.  I am concerned that many of the businesses emerging around Bitcoin right now seem scam-ridden and/or amateurish, but I try to remind myself that we're in the gold rush days.  My hope is that right now, dozens of competent individuals are building the next wave of Bitcoin businesses, and that more reputable merchants are looking into accepting Bitcoin.  When I see things like the Android app, I am heartened.  But in the end, it will be the people that make or break Bitcoin, not the technology.

Just to be clear, I'm not concerned about whether it offends me or not.  I think it should be deleted because:

1.  It's bad for Bitcoin.

2.  You're threatening an actual person, with family, maybe kids, etc.  He may be an asshole, but he doesn't deserve to have his life threatened. 

It's funny, you cry fascism, but in many ways your absolutist world view and view on violent speech closely mirrors the *real-life* fascism I came face to face with in ex-Yugoslavia in the 1990s.

Really?  Censorship disgusts you more than calls for murder?  I guess that sums up your character.

Can a moderator please delete the teenager " assassination market"  posts?  I agree this guy's an asshole and I'd love to see him disciplined or disbarred for making a trademark claim in bad faith (not that that's likely), but can we please try to maintain at least a veneer of morality here?

You people posting assassination market posts fail to realize that it's not a funny joke.  I'm sure your teenage friends are laughing it up, but in the grown-up world we're disgusted.

Can we please get some moderation on the thread in which the asshole lawyer filed a trademark claim on bitcoin?  I agree he's a jerk and I'd like to see him disbarred or disciplined for filing a fraudulent claim, but the "assassination market" posts are too much and should be deleted.  The world is watching, and as someone who is investing thousands of dollars in a Bitcoin related-business, I'm very concerned about the image these forums are giving the world.

IMHO, this is a great thread to show the problems of the early adopters hoarding the coins.  And you see, it has nothing to do with "stimulating the economy".  It has everything to do with making more people aware of Bitcoins.  In a way, each coin is its own marketing campaign.  The first time I actually used one to buy something was a feeling of intense liberation.  But if most of the coins are being kept off-market because a few people have the delusion that they´ll be multibillionaires one day, then many fewer people will have that experience, and so it's unlikely that the word will continue to spread.  Actually, that's the true paradox.  In order for the hoarders money to be worth something in the long run, they have to at least spend some of it.

Je ne sais pas si vous suivez les discussions à http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=26527.0  Un mec aux USA vient de déposer la marque Bitcoin et a l'intention de faire de même en France et ailleurs, parait-t-il.  C'est un avocat qui n'a rien à voir avec le projet Bitcoin...   Nous allons essayer de combattre la déposition aux USA et il serait une bonne idée pour les défenseurs de Bitcoin en France de faire pareillement, je crois.  Si non, ce mec pourrait poursuivre en justice tous ceux qui utilisent le nom Bitcoin, y compris les bureaux de change comme mt gox.

Merci.

Linux Mint is the bomb.  Every flavor of it. They've got even got a superlightweight LXDE spin that positively flies on older computers.  Mint looks great, too, unlike many of the Linux distros out there.  And if you like Mint LXDE, check out Peppermint OS, which is done by the same developers.  Linux's answer to Google Chrome OS.  Peppermint OS is cloud-centric, jaw-dropping quick, and beautiful, too.  Oh, and it uses Chromium instead of Firefox, which makes it even faster.

This is probably true.  My first instinct was to tell you that as a business owner, I can tell you that we don't care if a currency is appreciating or depreciating.  We care about getting more customers and better customers.  But I thought about it and changed my mind.  When the euro was gaining so much against the dollar back in 2007, I made a special effort to find more clients who paid me in Euros.  So clearly I do care about whether a currency I'm paid in is appreciating or depreciating, and others probably do as well.


Looking back, I twisted your words, so it's only fair you did the same to mine.  To be clear, I'm not suggesting that people buy things they don't need in Bitcoins.  I'm suggesting that they use their massive collections of Bitcoins to buy the things they do need.  And maybe they're doing so, who knows?  And the idea that large holders of Bitcoin will come out and spend coins on crap they don't need is ludicrous at this point.  It's not going to happen, and that's not what I'm advocating.

My concern here is not so much "stimulating the economy" as it is marketing the economy.  There's a subtle but important difference.  I'm not suggesting that people go hire workers to dig holes and fill them back up for the sake of stimulating the economy.  I'm suggesting that people spend Bitcoins -- on things they need -- so others will hear about them.  Over the past few weeks, I've come to realize that the absolute most important thing for Bitcoin at this stage is publicity -- good, bad, or in between.  I'm also urging people with lots of Bitcoins to make smart investments in infrastructure.  Clearly it's needed and it's in their interest to support Bitcoin. 

I am attracted to the idea of a deflationary economy, that's one of the many reasons I am intrigued by Bitcoins.  Clearly, the inflationary model leads only to boom and bust cycles and debt.  That said, Bitcoin's success is not the foregone conclusion many supporters seem to believe it is.  I hope I wrong about this -- I actually am happy to re-evaluate the evidence and admit when I'm wrong (see above).  And perhaps in six months I'll come back to this thread and eat crow.  But it doesn't take an economist to understand that if all the holders of a new currency hoard it, never spend it, and never attract any new users, it likely won't succeed *as an actual currency*.  In that case, Bitcoin may still succeed as an asset class, but my hopes for this stroke of genius are much higher than that.  I want to be able to spend Bitcoins anywhere in the world.

I'm glad as hell that someone discovered this.  Could have been a real headache.  Roger, I'll assume you weren't doing research on trademarking 'Bitcoin' yourself, right?  You were probably researching a product or service with 'Bitcoin' in the name.  Anyway, we all owe Roger a big thank you for finding this.

You know who might help us with this if it becomes a problem?  The EFF.  I'm upset at the way in which they returned all their Bitcoins, but I understand why they did it.  Even in a case like this, they would be serious legal and ethical issues involved if the EFF were holding any Bitcoins.

Alex, did it cost $100 to file the letter of protest?  And did you provide evidence of the MIT license?

Based on my research on this lawyer, Michael S. Pascazi, it looks like he probably has an ideological affinity for Bitcoin.  See: http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/2855  In any case, trademarking the name of an open source project a shitty thing to do.  I hope he's older and doesn't realize just how bad this will look in the eyes of Bitcoin supporters.  Mr. Pascazi, if you're reading this, perhaps you'd like to say a word or two in your defense?

Thank you for doing this.  I think it would be a good idea to focus in on the commercial opportunities that will be available to the first country that embraces digital currencies.  Also, it might be a good idea to talk about generalities such as 'alternative currencies' or 'digital currencies' rather than Bitcoin specifically, other than perhaps a brief mention: "for example Bitcoin".  But you know your audience better than we do and better understand what they are receptive to.

Are you doing this as part of the Iceland Pirate Party or as an individual citizen?  Either way, thank you.  It's a great idea.

Jeremy, my wife and I spend dozens of BTC worth of dollars on Amazon.com each month.  I'll definitely try to route that trade through you in the future.  I just "discovered" you this evening, unfortunately right after I had bought 5 BTC worth of books on Amazon.com.

Yes, this would do it.

Yes, exactly.  Put it this way, if Bitcoin succeeds in becoming a widely-accepted currency, it may or may not eventually hit 1000 dollars/Bitcoin.  Some people forget how easy it is to re-denominate Bitcoins into microbitcoins, and so forth.  But if Bitcoin does take off, whoever invests in the first professionally-run Bitcoin predictions market *will* become a very, very wealthy individual.  Of that there is no doubt.

I appreciate your ideas, and I enjoyed reading the post you linked to, but more importantly the debate that followed.  I also appreciate the idea of a deflationary economy, but this is not a mature economy.  It's in a fragile state.  And it needs people to spend Bitcoins, so that more merchants will adopt it as a mode of exchange.


So it's none of your business how early adopters do with their money, but it is your business what we do with our money?  I'm not sure I follow that logic.  Why should we patronize Bitcoin vendors when it would be so much smarter for us to save our Bitcoins, since they're worth so much?

The answer to that question is that we should patronize Bitcoin merchants and spend instead of save because if we don't, additional merchants won't adopt Bitcoin, and it will fade into obscurity and pennies on the dollar.  And what goes for us, who have only a few Bitcoins, goes for the early adopters, who have thousands of Bitcoins, a thousandfold.