I think it would be just huge since they need to compete with eBay, Amazon.
11 Main is located in California (San Mateo) - the most BTC - friendly state.
Discuss

quick answer: no

Did mr. Jeff Bezos just pay for the publication and is trying to say that the future is, if course, an Amazon coin?

because crapcoins are harmless. Only bitcoin carries serious threat to their potential facebookcoin

Who is gonna mine then? The hashingpower cannot grow exponentially indefinitely. We are going to hit a plateau at some point since there is no free energy in this world.

Personally I am not buying this. I want the replay from somebody who is grown up.

The Foundation is the first step towards BTC centralization. It's like: if you need international adoption and investors, you need centralization and controlled inflation. No more "to da moon" -kinda stuff

So most of the optimistic expectations are coming from the assumption that the existing fragile hashpower disposition will be forever: 20%-ish for BTCGuild, 35%-ish for CEX.io, 5%-ish for Slush pool, the rest 40% for "unknown sources", etc. However, in case of global BTC adoption it is easy for major players to possess up to 99% of the whole network and leave the remaining 1% for Slush+CexIO+BTCGuild+the rest. And not necessarily that possessing 99% of the whole network will cause massive double spending. They will just keep the network with all the nodes. Of course, the "original" or "true" BTC fork will be alive and running on the garage ASICs, and used for minor bar tiping or something like that.

This is similar to gold rush in California: amateurs with shovels are gone since shoveling is no longer profitable; big cartels with heavy machinery are now doing the mining, capturing new territories and setting new rules of the game.

There is an opinion that the Foundation is full of crap and controls nothing. I am just speculating that there is a possibility that the Foundation is not that harmless and powerless than it could appear at the first look. I almost guarantee the changes once the real big dogs start joining the Foundation.

How about the following conspiracy theory: US is preparing plan B: US dollar will no longer be trusted in the nearest future, US dept is off control, there is no way in increase the upper limit of it, etc. In other words US dollar "on the verge of collapse" and will go down to tubes in 10 years.
So they decided to come up with cryptocurrency - a Bitcoin. But if US officials introduce BTC to public - they will be laugh out right on site. So they are asking MIT, Stanford teams to come up with the algorithm for BTC. Strict non-disclosure agreement had been signed. So the mysterious Satoshi is just a team of the brightest PhD students under control. Wide public loves something open source and revolutionary? You got it: BTC! Invented by anonymous guy who donated his invention to the public!
Once BTC is adopted internationally, the real "Satoshi" (US) comes to the scene and adjusts the rules of the game.
How about that?

Disclaimer: this is just speculation, I have no fricking idea who Satoshi really is and if US are smart enough to start the thing like BTC

Sure they will vote against those who have BTC and Kilo-BTC. The voting will be initiated by those who controls Mega-BTC

I think big players could easily control 90% or more of all hashing power. Say, a megapool driven by asics on hundreds of acres at Greenland or Alaska.

Disclaimer: I am not going to spread FUD, just want to share some thoughts and find answers

The more I buy & mine, the more thoughts like that are coming to my mind. I doubt that big dogs will let lots of people with their "20..50..100 and up" coins to become rich elite overnight.

The consensus between core devs and big players could be reached. And a new blackchain is introduced to masses, while legacy blockchain is still running until it's extinction. How about that?

Let's say that at some point when big players enter the game, the foundation starts gaining the power. How about that?

But big investors already articulated their interest: they want BTC to be inflatable. Reasonable, but inflatable. Something like: yes, BTC is great, innovative technology, but in order to make it useful international currency, it needs to be inflatable. Say, 1-5M bitcoins a year. The general population ("the community") will eat this no problem. Early adopters will be pissed off for sure, but they are in minority.

So frustrated for buying just 10 coins when the price was $420..
Also missed very nice $380 price this April: I was on a Caribbean trip that time and was completely away from internet, cell phone..

Say, at some point big banks and hedge funds make an agreement with core developers to remove the limitation of 21M and have the foundation vote for this?
Is it possible in theory and on practice?

now, where is that dickhead (igorr?) with his "down to da tubes" charts?

nope. it was from explanation of one chinese guy: he explained how their "PBOC / BTC exchanges" relationship works: like "ant vs tree" (where "ant" -> any btc exchange, and "tree" : PBOC and/or government).

Got the picture?