It's hard to forget that every coin at some point belongs to a miner, I'm disappointed in you.

You guys forget one important factor related to Oil Prices. War.

It contributes to higher prices in thee accords: At first it is concentrated in strategic regions where there is oil in the ground. This will create artificial scarcity and drive up prices.
Second all those drones, jets and the whole marine fleet consume an increasing amount of fuel.
Third Oil is an important raw material for war machinery, there is fuel consumed by constructing it and every time an actual hot conflict takes place the destroyed infrastructure needs to be rebuilt.

And finally all of the above makes oil a big target for the pump & dumpers on wall street.

Actually that would be defrauding it.

Nobody would be willing to deal with 3 digit coins until well after the block-reward halving occurs.

Again a machine is by definition lifeless. Discussing a hypothetical scenario where we could enable life makes no sense since we have no idea how it could be accomplished.
Genetic algorithms and artificial networks are exactly what falls under computer science as the subject of "AI" they are exactly the mathematical processes I was referring to.

Except when something is impossible by definition.
Could it be possibly to enable mechanical life some day? Who knows, but that wouldn't be artificial nor a machine.

Artificial Intelligence is a cybernetically impossible transformation. It's just not possible to create it, by definition.

Machines can be arbitrarily complex but they are defined in such a way that they depend on Man to control them. In computer science AI is used as a weasel word to describe mechanisms which attempt to solve problems using mathematical concepts which should, in theory enable the machine to compute solutions for problems it wouldn't have sufficient computational strength using other methods.
In transhumanism it refers to self-improving machines which again can not be constructed by definition. Every machine will still have a constraint defined by the parameters it is programmed even if it is able to construct copies of itself and use stochastic processes to fine-tune the parameters.

The Bitcoin forum thought me about libertarian ideology and it's fallacies by first hand observation. At some time I even considered them bearable but not anymore, they are selfish, rude and hypocritical.

I still consider myself an anarchist and have assumed that libertarians share some of my views, but sadly from what I've leaned here nothing can be further from the truth. They propose a system where a binding contract is enforced by hierarchical structures which is ultimately harmful. Debt should never be considered to be backed by law because it undermines trust. Payment should be instant and the fulfilment of debt voluntary.
Bitcoin is a good example of a system which ultimately doesn't work with debt (or more specifically profiting from other people debt) and the recent failures within this community are directly linked to libertarian ideology.

What's keeping you?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QDv4sYwjO0 (yeah I know cheap, but I just had to...)

I haven't realized that, coblee is that nice of a guy. That gives me a shred of hope for this community, at least for that tiny part of it.

Lol I'm not talented for this.

Here is it anyway  

But at least it has a leaf

That is also poethic justice, you see for every person who would be left for dead in a Libertarian wonderland there is one satoshi illegally possessed by pirate. (Purposefully exaggerated, your mileage may vary)

I'm fine with that. Poetic justice nothing more.

I'm glad you agree.  You see it's that easy to get along

Imagine a world where both a Binding Contract and Artificial Intelligence are considered the product of fanatic nutjobs imagination as a general consensus in society.

The world would be so much better. 

This whole thread is incredible - Libertarians vs. Transhumanists, it's the ultimate Internet war.
Like cyborgs vs pirates, just with logical fallacies instead of bullets.

I'm not wikipedia.

Yes it is. They are interpreting redshit this way. Other interpretations are not only possible but have been done consistently.

You still are assuming conditions postulated by big bang cosmology. For instance you assume all galaxies are moving away from us, assume all stars will eventually burn out (without new ones to replace them).
Given an infinite universe there could very well be a case where matter is created out of literally nothing.... I know, I know we are getting into fringe science here. But there is almost no research into this subject so I might as well assume all of those conditions could be true.