The Cyprus issue includes not just what happened, but what was considered and expected for future.
The "bail-in" proposal of deposit tax exchanged for shares of failing banks presents a future model.
Wipe out lenders/bondholders and dilute shareholders by hitting the deposits to cover losses and secured debt and issuing essentially worthless shares to compensate for the deposits seized, and let it keep functioning.  If the bank manages to pull out after that, those shares may someday be worth something, but that would be largely unexpected.

Well done.  Its often said that if you don't ask, you don't get.
..But I was thinking something more on the order of a specially marked commemorative, encased suitably for display, with a personal note of thanks signed by the designer.  Sources of inspiration merit unique rewards.

Link to Sam's on-the-record statement please?

All I found was:
Which was just a quote of a quote, and out of context, but still seems different than your statement above.
It suggests they expect to follow the pre-order queue for shipping, and do not mention any expectation to throttle production capacity artificially.

Thank you for this.
I think I now have the new motto I was seeking:

"COGNITARE EXTRA BUXUM"

Look for it to appear prominently on the newly upcoming bitcoin silver pieces.
Pure cloud-sourced genius, .999 fine.

Those Teflon onions ...

Imagine a script where Snowden's Catch 22 of being unwilling to keep both his sense of duty and the uniform, and so flees the cyberwar.  Sounds more like Orr than Yossarian though.  Unless there was some deal not yet in evidence, then Yossarian might be a fit.
Truth is stranger than fiction.

Correct.  Being wealthier doesn't provide the incentive to buy something, but having the best use for something does provide that incentive.
If there is a piece of very fine wood, suitable for crafting into a violin, but I only know how to make chairs, even if it is good enough to make a chair I won't want to pay as much as the violin craftsman would pay for that piece of wood.  Even if I am 1000x wealthier, the wood will be bought by the violin craftsman because they can make money with their craft at a higher price for the wood than I would be able to do.  I can make a very fine chair with the second tier of wood, and still make a profit.  This best use determination is the mechanism of capitalist price-discovery.  People pay what something is worth to them, and not more, based on their assessment of what their best use is for the thing.

This can best be achieved through price-discovery, and that metric is lost in the creative commons.  We end up with the first-mover (amoral) or the forceful (immoral) getting the choice piece of wood, rather than the person with the best use.  Or worse, decisions through the guild politics.

Most all trades are win-win (moral).  This is so when the price paid is less than what the payer values it, and more than the seller's cost.  When both have a choice in the trade, either can say no if this is not true.  This is the essence of mutual-aid, and it is why capitalism is moral, and why communism isn't.

Price may be more dependent on money flow rather than mining efficiency for the time being.

Coinabul are good folks.
My prices are better, but coinabul provide a much better retail experience.

OK, that surprised me. That would be the Materialist philosophy (that only matter and energy exist), which is distinct from economic materialism (excessive desire to acquire and consume).
Pure Materialists philosophy has become fairly rare since Kant and Hegel.  Mary Midgley, who seems like she might have been a strong philosophical ally of much of what you have written, would probably have argued that Materialist philosophy is a source of either immorality, or amorality. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Midgley

Like you, I favor reduction-ism.  But my skepticism won't let me find my way to pure Materialism.

Agreed.  That is very likely why the Anarcho-capitalists call themselves anarcho-capitalist rather than simply capitalist, in order to distinguish the two.

YES!  In an efficient capitalism (such as the anarcho-capitalists suggest), those that know how to use that-of-which-the-stockpile-consists will have the highest use of that stockpile.  The stockpile will be of higher value to those that know, and they will easily gain it by trade due to those capabilities.  Capitalism is the mechanism by which that superior-knowledge-and-use can be determined.  Without the metrics of capitalism, there is not a way to easily measure that best use, other than force or first-movers.

The an-caps would additionally assert that state interference can have the effect of degrading the efficiency of capitalism.
And that typically once those inefficiencies are discovered, folks tend to attempt to patch it with an additional layer of state interference.
This is often followed by frustrated face-palming and highly energetic communications.

This makes sense to me as well.

I am not convinced yet by that proposition.
It appears that Materialism and Statism exist world-wide.

But I think that it may be possible for people to engage in trade without either, and that capitalism is not innately dependent upon them, even in realms where they exist. 
It occurs to me that we may  be doing so just now, exchanging without either.
We are engaged in the free-trade... of ideas.
We are trading our time, or labor or toil with each other by focusing on the effort of the other and crafting responses, each to the other.  The product of this is non-material, but it is the capital created by our efforts, which we trade with each other, and also freely give to the watchers.  My hoped for gain in this exchange is entirely non-material.  I seek only a better understanding.

If either of us were to stop, the exchange between us would cease.
So long as we consider it equitable, we continue.  And yet we have exchanged nothing material, and there has been no intervening state (notwithstanding PRISM, *hi guys*)

GPU and even CPU mining may be on the rise rather than on the decline.
Your assumption is that others also have to pay for power, environment, hardware, and etc in the same way that you do.
There exists a tremendous amount of unused computing power sitting idle in data centers with already sunk costs, and owned by corporations.
The amount of already paid for but unused computing power dwarfs the amount of ASICs.  
Corporate IT admins could be turning on mining.

Confirmed

Not a heroic amount, but don't seem to get around to using them much.
A quarter million on American, maybe a hundred thousand on United.

which one plays cgminer?

How are you able to determine that GPU use is dropping from these statistics?

This is a great example to use, because it is never so simple as caring/not caring and valuation.
There are a vast constellation of concerns that accompany these decisions that we casually make every day.

Just how hungry is your child and how many dimes do you have in order to buy enough eggs to make it through the day?
Or are you baking a love gift cake and want only the finest and most ethical components?

The materialist may not see any difference between the eggs, where the capitalist could place some value on the non-material elements.

To deconflate capitalism and materialism, perhaps distinguishing the two may shed light between them make communication of the ideas they relate to more smooth.

If capitalism is the system of measuring the value, and materialism is the choosing of ignore spiritual value and focus solely on the physical,
In combination they may lead to a devaluation of the human condition.

However, they are distinguishable and different.  Capitalism allows for valuing not merely physical objects, but experience and thought as well as the universe of other possibilities a person can ascribe value.  It is merely the system that allows us each to agree on how we value what we value and come to agreement with each other on how to mutually advantage each other to achieve what we each value.

If you value freedom more than another, you may choose to keep your time unconstrained by agreeing to bargain with it for anything.
A materialist may value an asset more highly than freedom, and trade away their time (but not another's) more easily. 

The word "capitalism" has been tarnished by conflating these ideas by those that would prevent the freedom to choose how we each ascribe individual values by ceding that responsibility and right to assign value to a central authority.  Continuing that conflating confusion may create unnecessary conflict with the An-Cap folks who are struggling to throw out the bathwater and hang on to the baby.

There are some assumptions built into this analysis that may not hold up.

1) The assumption that the mining is done by ASIC
2) The assumption that there is not free power and free computers (or spare power / spare computers) doing mining.

It is entirely possible that some corporation that has a lot of computers connected and under utilized in facilities with already sunk costs for power, HVAC, real estate, connectivity may have just decided that they want to make use of their spare devices for a very small marginal cost start using them to mine bitcoin.

If this were true, this could have the effect of reducing the BTC/$ rather than raising it.  This is because the mining could be done at such a low marginal cost that the cost per mined coin goes down rather than up.  Further a corp might not need to show a quarterly profit and see that as more important than any long term hold opportunity and have the incentive to sell all mined coins as they are generated.
The secondary effect of this is that ASIC purchases would slow, because they are not as profitable as they once were.

That this may become a more common trend until the ASIC prices and demand falls to a more manageable level.
It would not be a bad thing for Bitcoin, and may even help to entrench it into the existing business environments if this practice continues.

If (for example) someone at IBM, ATT, or Google thought it might be a good idea to make use of their extra systems siting in data centers and rolled out mining installations  to their computing centers globally, you could see a difficulty increase such as this in advance of new ASIC shipments.
Or consider that data center consolidation is an ongoing project, there could be a data center disconnection planned that is delayed for some reason, and enterprising engineers make use of that extra time to get some mining done.
There are many possibilities that exist outside the narrow assumptions that we make thinking that everyone is doing things just in the same way and under the same conditions as we may be doing them.

Think outside the box.
Cognitare Extra Buxum

Thanks for the encouragement.
It is a thankless task, usually.
Though rarely do I get to it first, most will just label the paypal-BTC buyer a scammer or poke them with a stick.
I'd rather see the paypal->BTC buyer succeed with style.
I'm curious about your riskless paypal transaction.
If you care to explain it, I may sell you the BTC you seek.

It is not good to assume knowledge in others without any evidence of that knowledte.
You should mention these in your ad, or you take the risk that the person you trade with DOES NOT know that they are taking a risk.
Doing that will help you build your own reputation after you successfully and ethically complete your trade.