Because you can see your orders in an order book.

Darnit, my secret identity is revealed !  

Me neither 

The title says it all. 
I am looking for an easy way (I am not really tech-savvy) to extract data points from the blockchain.info charts to import into an excell-like program, so I can look at ratios of different metrics etc.

TIA !

So you are giving back 2000+ dollars to the owner?

My hat off to you sir !

ok, thanks for the confirmation !

Hi

Would it be a good idea to be able to post questions/remarks on specific statements?

For example I am looking at
" Existence of extraterrestrials to be officially confirmed by US government by the end of 2012", and I want to make sure we are talking about "Grey" alien-type stuff here, consciously visiting earth, not some sort of bacteria reaching earth from mars on an asteroid or whatever.  Seems like this is the intention, but I would not want to get screwed on technicalities.

Also, I am quite sure there is no way to lose money if your bet is correct, but a confirmation of this would ease my mind, I am not used to betting online .

Government crackdown?  Bitcoin don't care.  It doesn't give a shit.  Nothing can stop the bitcoin network.

I suggest Terry Pratchett enters the competition: " Now this line of code calls a magical gnome, which runs through your internet cable to the blockchain, and writes your transaction in the next block"

Ok, I think we are talking about 2 different things here 1) how capital would be distributed across the population & 2) how the economy would work (which I was addressing before).  

I did not first realise your emphasis/concern on nr.1 (I read a little too quick).  Like you said in your own post, if the market forces would drive a strong positive feedback loop of capital gaining more capital, and lack thereof leading to ever more poverty then either A) a lot of poverty will exist or B) there will be sufficient offsetting measures for wealth redistribution (like taxes etc.).  It will just be a more extreme form of the thug of war that has allways existed somewhat between rich and poorer people I guess, one group believing it is unfair that their property is being taken from them, the other group believing it is unfair that they have little property and little possibility to escape from this position. (remember I am talking about an extreme future scenario in which lack of available work would deny a poor person the ability to gain capital for himself, I am not talking about the present situation in which savers and taxpayer money is being funneled to wall street banks...).

Now if there was some sort of good resolution, everybody could have their own robots, and nobody would have to worry about a thing :-), tadaa: singularity-like utopia.  (provided population growth is halted, and everybody's needs could be provided for sustainably).
This is all pretty pie in the sky though, who knows how it would play out...

I still don't see the problem.  Why do you insist on the need for people to buy your stuff in this hypothetical scenario?  Trading is a solution to satisfy your own needs (and do so more efficiently), it is not a goal in itself.


Because personal computers only became mainstream since Bill Gates and Steve Jobs were retards? 

I think you are thinking too much as an economist, which tends to cloud common sense :-) (just look at Krugman).
In the extreme case: if robots can produce everything and do all the work, and you own all the robots, why on earth would you want to sell anything to anybody?
The only reason you sell things to others is so you can have goods or services from them in return (or promises for such things in the future).  If all your needs are being fulfilled, where is the need to sell stuff?

In the short run, quite impossible to say IMHO.  In the long run, I think something like the inflation rate+ productivity increase.

Summing up the obvious, I think there are a lot of "ands" in this story.
A person has to know about/have bitcoins AND want to buy a humble bundle AND have to be aware of the walletbit offer for this to work out.
Good principle to be a middleman though.

My god, I find myself largely agreeing with Paul Krugman, what has the world come to !!  :-)

Seems like a fair assessment that automation will diminish the relative value of labor versus capital, and will on average increase the difference between the haves and the have-nots (until/unless wealth redistribution takes place).  It should increase overall wealth though.

Yup.
If he asks the question because he wants to have a measure of bitcoins "market cap" versus dollar "market cap", it makes more sense to look at the monetary base compared to M2 or M3 though.  Well, maybe not at the moment, but in the future bitcoins could be used in a fractional reserve banking system too, which would dilute their value similar to dollar inflation through fractional reserve lending.

2,667.575 Billions of Dollars

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/BASE/

Please note that this is base money.  When you count bank deposits etc. as well, this number is higher (but bank deposits aren't really fully money, they have a large component of loans and other assets in them as well, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_supply for more information.)


Divide this monetary base by 21 million and you'll get a nice number  

Actually, if you make a few assumptions, there is (see my post here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113606.msg1365598#msg1365598 ).
I just wish I had done the calculation back then, because even though I knew it could be explosive if it was adopted, I never knew just how explosive it could get.  Knowing this, I probably would have spend more time figuring out the pro's and con's.

Same here, I first heared about bitcoin around januari 2011, but most people I listened to were pretty dismissive of it, so I didn't really put much effort into figuring it out in depth [I think there was an initial emotional reaction too ("this could be a better monetary alternative than gold, this could threaten my gold investment, so I don't want it to be true...")], and forgot about it afterwards.  
Would have been nice to buy in at 0.3 $ instead of 13$ though   .

I can imagine a lot of people people googling "what is 1 internet", and staying confused for a very long time...