People don't have too much problem using large numbers, but small decimals are problematic. Even companies get it wrong:

http://verizonmath.blogspot.com/2006/12/verizon-doesnt-know-dollars-from-cents.html

"Gimme one coffee to go, please."

"That'll be 500 mikes, pal."

I like it.

Sorry, I still don't get the site.  That GOOOH thing has been on the site for at least a year and has been number one for a while now, but I don't think it's been done on the show.  Of the 3 under 'completed' the one with the most votes had some 600 votes.  So, I don't see what the number of votes has to do with getting on the show.  Rather, it just looks to me like people vote on topics and when they happen to appear on the show, they get moved into 'completed'.  But, it looks like they're not put on the show because they were on the list.

One question.

BTC = Bitcoin
UBC = ?

I feel like BTC Days Destroyed should be able to be roughly calculated (not exact) by the average number and size (in btc) of transactions per block and the average interval between blocks, over the entire life of bitcoins.  Like couldn't I just find the total amount of BTC traded per block, and get how many "bitcoin blocks" instead of "bitcoin days" by using the summation forumla:

(Blocks^2 + Blocks) / 2

And then just figure out the average number of blocks per day.  Those figures should give a basis of measurement of btc days destroyed should they not?  Is that true, or am I wrong about that?

If I am correct, could somebody post the (roughly accurate but not completely accurate) formula for btc days destroyed, since I can't read python!..?  Thank you!

And what's to keep the individual miners in that pool from simply switching to another pool. Or mining for themselves? The hashes/sec are still going to be present for the most part

Before you can use your cell phone to pay at a B&M store we need payments to be processed in less than 30 minutes. It needs to be at least 200 times that fast.

more likely they not "turned back to BTC", but simply lack extra-staff to handle it.
when BTC status/flow clarified and simplified, its back, IMO.

Deflation is simple math in a growing economy.  Bitcoin says it is built to create a stable economy.   Really it is built to create an extremely stagnant economy.   It would be better if their were an algorithm for controlled growth over time.  I am for Bitcoin.  BUT As value and population increase in an economy and you don't grow the money supply, deflation is inevitable.   Everyday central banks are attempting to not only protect against inflation but deflation as well.   Here is an example......

Say there are 2 people in an economy.  1 guy grows corn and likes to have his shoes shined and on person shines shoes and needs corn to survive and there is only 1 BC to exchange.   Each day they will exchange the 1 BC as value is rendered for it.   But if the corn grower grows 10x and the Shoe shine boy grows by 10x and there is still 1 BC the average exchange will be 10 cents oh and some people may starve to death.   This is a very simple example that can be expanded upon.     Lets say I am a baker and I buy my inputs and I even stock up to have a months supply but when I go to sell my bread the price of bread has gone down to where it cost me more to buy the inputs than I could sell it for.   Soon I would stop backing bread.   

Bottom line as an economy grows from value being created with demand the BCs need to be there.   Even gold grows..... or is "mined" and is added to the money supply.   I love love to see smart industrious hard working people add value and keeping the currency stagnant will stop that.   There will not be an incentive to do it and there will be wars. This is not a viable currency until this is taken into effect.   Many on Wall Street have stated that the Fed should be replaced with an algorithm.   There has been open discussion on this. 

The value in BCs is:
-It can't be stopped.
-It can be very transparent.

Just make the growth transparent and allow the miners to continue to mine based on a very open algorithm.   The algorithm would need to be perfected over time but it would be very transparent in doing this. 

Really? I know they were asked and rejected it, and they don't say anything about it now. http://seasteading.org/interact/forums/engineering/infrastructure/introducing-bitcoins?page=2, http://forum.bitcoin.org/?topic=1746.0

It's recent, that's the "official" list and all important ones should be there.

You're original point was "why don't companies take a chance on America" and then in the last post you talked about online poker.  Using that example, do you really think any new online poker company is going to make its home base in the USA?...

No.  I personally do not.  The bitcoin system requires a block chain to function, but any copy of that block chain will do for me.  Only my copy of the wallet.dat will do. 

You have neatly avoided my observation that distributing an encrypted wallet is not actually that secure, it is only as safe as the password chosen, rather than the strength of the encryption method  used, so you really shouldn't be broadcasting your wallet anyway.

I really think you're taking this far too literally.  I specifically said I wasn't suggesting anyone do this.  For practical purposes it is obviously (so obvious that I can't believe I've been sucked into this) easier to encrypt your wallet and store it in the cloud.  I'm also assuming that computers exist and that the Internet still works; but really these are just nit picking what was not ever a practical suggestion.  You miss the point though, which others seem to have got: Bitcoin wealth can (note: can, not should) be stored with no physical presence whatsoever.  To me, that is magical.  If it's not to you: fine, let's agree to disagree and say no more.

Are there any non-profit organizations taking bitcoins right now? I am just kind of doing this for fun, not a serious profit.