So it appears we'll have to all stop mining for awhile and let a few unprofitable bagholders hang on until the difficulty adjusts back down a level that matches the negligable reward

So let's be clear:

1.  PWC, with the new checkpoints, is perfectly valid.  Anyone can mine it.  Anyone can use it.  It will, like the other 40 or so low hash rate coins, remain vulnerable to further 51% attacks

2.  An attacker was able to steal coins from Cryptsy using an exploit where they deposited coins on a forked block chain and then proceeded to withdraw those coins on a real blockchain

3.  Vern has fixed the vulnerability in #2 but does not have sufficient PWC to pay everyone their full balance

While this particular attack is unlikely to occur again, a far more common one is far an attacker to do a 51% attack, deposit coins to an exchange, immediately convert to BTC, and then withdraw the BTC.  That attack is easier to pull off and much harder for an exchange to protect against.

Anyone trading alt coins on an exchange needs to be aware coins can effectively be stolen from an exchange in this manner resulting in a loss of capital for the traders.  That is why there are very few exchanges that allow low hash rate coins to be traded.

Great work.  Let's try to keep this on the low for awhile - last thing we want is for massive GPU farms to rush in and crush profitability

We do need to consider how much LTC that 6990 could have mined between then and now

Suggest we rename this to Inflation Coin

Just a large GPU farm

Remember that in the bitcoin world ASICS are cranking out 25 gh/s per unit

You know ASICS have arrived when you see one miner with more capacity than the entire network previously had

In the case of Litecoin, the network is 20 gh/s so 135 mh/s is quite literally nothing.  Drop in the bucket

If DGC goes up, the buyer will NOT be returning any DGC to the bank.  To make shareholders whole, the bank will then need to acquire additional DGC at a higher rate incurring a loss to the bank or the bank will need to return less DGC to the shareholder.

This is a zero sum game.  A bank and its shareholders cannot guarantee a speculator a profit without incurring counter-party risk.  

This is a proof by inspection problem that, absent some profoundly huge fees (an option premium), the bank and its shareholders will lose money over time

They are essentially writing a call option with no option premium.  Nobody in the investment community does that because it is a money losing proposition.  Why do you think there are no similar services for Gold or Silver?  Except for an outright scam, a company would be out of its mind to guarantee cash refunds on purchase of a highly speculative investment.

If this goes live, just buy 100% of the bank's DGC and then dump it on an exchange if the price goes up.  Free money for you.  Bad day for someone else.

Look I trade options very regularly.  I cannot express in words how bad of a value proposition this is for the bank.  They are guaranteeing speculators a profit.

I'll buy all the DGC they have FOR THE LIMIT please.  Put me first in line.

let me be more clear - the pawn shop owner is assuming 100% of the risk if the asset declines in value while, in exchange, getting NONE OF THE UPSIDE.

That has enormous negative value.  It is like selling a call option to someone with no premium.  Every investor on the planet would be lined up around the block to take the free option.

So highlighting the error.  Everyone assumes that the bank can simply "mint" $1,000 of DGC out of thin air while holding onto the $1,000 in deposits as an escrow.

Hence, they assume the bank incurs no loss since it can just return the $1,000.

What people ignore is how the bank gets the DGC.  They can't just mint it.  The bank needs to buy a large quantity of DGC at market value or, more likely, it would need to buy the DGC using the capital provided by the buyer.

Hence, the bank NO LONGER HAS THE $1,000 since it HAD TO BUY THE DGC WITH IT.

Hence, when DGC crashes and the buyer comes back for his refund the bank has to come up with $1,000 out of pocket.  If the DGC they buy with it is only worth $1, admittedly an extreme case, the bank just lose $999

The pawn shop can't mint gold.  He has to buy it at market and, with that scheme, he would be guaranteed to lose money every time someone returns it.

Simple economics.  If you guarantee a counter-party will always break even or make a USD profit, you incur the USD loss if the asset goes down in value.

If Gold goes from $1400 an ounce to $1 an ounce, admittedly an extreme example, the pawn shop owner ends up buying back a near worthless asset with hard currency.  He didn't acquire that asset for free - he had to buy it (!!!)

The error in assumption everyone is making here is they assume DGC is free for the bank.  That is NOT the case the bank needs to acquire DGC on an exchange for USD or BTC

Look guys I hate to burst the bubble on this but it is just simple economics.

Consider the case of a pawn shop owner who gets the great idea that he can sell more physical gold if he guarantees to always buy it back for the purchase price ...

Oops.  Welcome to bankruptcy, Mr. Pawn Shop owner.

Any value DGC has at this point in time is relative to its BTC or USD exchange rate.  Believe me if you buy $10k worth of DGC on Cryptsy for too high of a price and it falls 90% in value, you just lost your shirt.

If the bank buys back $10k of DGC worth $1k in market value, it just lost its shirt

This does not work.  The bank will get crushed if DGC falls in value.

Simply put, the bank is guaranteeing a counter-party a profit while assuming all of the downside risk.  If DGC falls, the bank will end up holding the same quantity of an asset that is now much less valuable.

This coin was already released don't try to pretend it is a new coin

My pool was out for a couple of hours this morning - looks like the DGC client had frozen up and wasn't taking requests.  Hence, we weren't finding any blocks during that period.

It has been restored to normal operation

This ruins my whole image of Argentina.  I thought South Americans were honest people

My P2Pool is averaging about 4.3% DOA/Stale to the Digital Coin network.  The worse it ever gets is around 10% DOA/Stale

Where is coin choose coming up with 25% ?

We have Chinacoin and AmericanCoin so why not ArgentinaCoin?