Yes, I made such an assumption.  I have no evidence that can reasonablely support this position, but nor is there any evidence to support the position that $2 was an overcorrection.  There simply isn't enogh data to make such a determination, and there cannot be.

The ghostwriter has been outed, ironicly because he apparently did put his name to one of the letters in question.

Channel 19 is a local channel to my hometown.

http://runronpaul.com/interest/breaking-author-of-ron-paul-racist-newsletters-revealed/

While I believe that the initial floor of $2 a couple of months ago, and the following slow rises to $3 or so are justifiable based upon fundemental metrics related to the bitcoin economy; the most recent spike to $6+ is unfounded and indicative of a rising mania.  The growth of the bitcoin economy simply hasn't had the time to keep up with that kind of runnup.

I have to note here, that these recommendations are valid regardless of the accuracy of the predictive power of a single, pre-iron age society.

Aww, man!  I knew that and didn't even think about it!  Good show.

FDR was a closet racist, and Lincoln was openly so.  I find the claim that RP has a single racist bone in his body to be difficult to accept, and even if he is, he doesn't vote that way.  You shall know them by the fruits of their actions.

Why would you give it back?  They donated it to his campaign under the false impression that he shared their ideologies.  That's their error, why compound it by giving it back to them so that they can use it?  Why not use it for the campaign?  That's not to mention the sheer complexity of giving back a campaign donation to a federal campaign.  That is a rediculous idea from the start.  If you were a naive RP supporter, and are no longer naive and not a RP supporter, then I'm 16 and sexy. I'm calling bullshit.

If that becomes the norm, yes.

A true Gandian, I presume?

If you really want to make a difference, register as a republican in your state as soon as you can, and attend your precinct caucas.  Try to get elected as a county delegate, and then as a state delegate at the county convention (which can happen an hour later in some cases).  When you get to the state convention, try to get elected as a national delegate or help elect someone who can attend.  This is how the true power structure works, the primary elections are a preference poll, and are often not binding upon the delegates.  Particularly if their assigned candidate has dropped out and/or no candidate can get a majority of votes on the first round.  This is the magic that the Ron Paul campaign pulled off yesterday, capturing a majority of delegates to the state convention all but secures a majority of the delegates sent to the national convention will be favorable to Ron Paul as the nominee should they get released from their assigned candidate.  The new national rules within the republican party all but garantees that the convention will be "brokered" without any single candidate capturing an absolute majority of delegates.  The last thing that the Ron Paul campaign wants is a two man race.

Definately not.

I've got bad news for you guys.  None of you get to choose.  Even if you are a Republican, odds are high that you don't really even get a vote.  Mitt took first place in the popular vote in Iowa with 25% and Ron Paul got third place with 21%, but the popular vote is only a proxy.  The actual delegates are chosen by the causas process, not the vote.  The voting is simply a non-binding straw poll, and there is nothing that binds those delegates to vote for the winner once they get to the state convention.  And no one watches the state convention.

This is an utterly rediculous statement.

If this were remotely true, then bitcoin would rise to the moon again.  Considering that the reality is much more muted than it was in the spring, I doubt that there is much blind optimism.


I've personally bought dozens of items online.  The system has a steeper learning curve than using credit cards, but it's easier once you know how.  If it were useless, I would have sold out last year.


Gold isn't consumed either, and your statement that everyone who bought on the way up needs to eventually sell them is just as true with regard to gold.  Gold is still a commodity.  Consumption isn't a necessary requirement.


The market is very tiny, and growing at an estimatable rate of at least 50% APR.  That's not slow by any metric, even though it would still take decades at that rate to match a moderately sized western economy, and that rate is almost certainly not sustainable.


More specificly, 7200 bitcoins come into existence every single day.  It's is because of that precision of increases in the monetary base and the knowledge that the market continues to absorb those new bitcoins without a drop in value is how the growth rate of the economy can be estimated.


Which is just as true with just about anything else, only much less so due to bitcoin's very small economy.  As the economy grows larger, those bubbles will become less and less dramatic.


Probably, but are you a sucker?


Is that your problem? Or theirs'?


Couldn't speculate upon that, but whether they are suckers or not, they keep coming.  So by definition, the bitcoin economy grows.


It always does.  The market depth on mtgox doesn't reflect a significant portion of the market, since there is much more in the 'dark pools' and who use bots to trade without showing up on the data charts.  Don't put too much faith in that.


Obviously, someone is that stupid.  Or that smart, depending on the outcomes.  Time will tell.

You guys are overthinking it.  When a bitcoin driven version of this...

https://www.flinc.org/

...becomes a viable model in major urban areas, then bitcoin would drive a rise in ad-hoc, and unmarked taxi services.

What are the odds that this overlay network could be used to permit two mobile devices to transact directly, in the absence of Internet access for one or both parties?  For example, a direct ad-hoc wifi connection or an indirect connection via a 'piratebox' type device?  Asuuming, of course, that the sending device doesn't need Internet access to produce a transaction from it's own, known address funds.

Could you provide a rough, layman's explaination of that algo please?

1) No idea.  I've never bought bitcoins this way.

2) Vulnerable to what, exactly? 

3) Again, vulnerable in what way?

4) Not long.

Magic The Gathering Online Exchange

At least, that's what it was orginaly.  The site neither shares the original intent of the founder, nor any of it's codebase anymore, so it's become a kind of branding; like Amazon doesn't really tell you that they started off selling books online, either.

Again, the internal block structure can be pruned to whatever level the client's owner feels is appropriate, all the way to nearly nothing.  Most 'thin' clients won't need to even receive more than the block headers to start with, and thus won't need to 'prune' at all, but instead collect the data that is directly relevant to it's own addresses on the fly.  Your idea has merit, but offer little advantage to the current system, but huge risk of creating an unintended attack vector.

Likely, and that is a problem.  An outflow of foriegn cash implies a trade inbalance, and one not favorable to the use of bitcoin as a value transfer mechanism unless it can help tp remedy that outflow.