because they are all getting arrested like Burt W

if I had a briefcase with $250k in it and I wanted to buy bitcoins who would I talk to? or is that not even possible these days?

Let's hope that this reduces the price manipulation.

I know that this is good news but I am more interested in what BTC will do for consumers rather than traders. Anyhow one step at a time.

Interesting observation related to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_noise_control

i have three Sp20 and one S5 in the same room with S5 running with Noctua and Scythe ultra kaze fans (push pull).
I suddenly realized that i have much less noise in comparison when I had just two Sp20 and one S5.
Upon measurement, approximately same amount of noise is coming from each Sp20 at ~69dB and a little less (maybe 64db from S5 with two fans) with all measurements at 1 ft.
However, at the door, just four feet away, the noise already drops to just 61 dB, which is a much faster drop comparing with a single machine.
My point is that most likely some of these miners produce the "anti-noise" (see article).
I set up (accidentally) my three Sp20 in such a way that one is at fan 10 (fixed), one at fan 6 and one at fan 14 (these two on auto).

Right now with all four miners running, I have just 51dB ten feet away and can barely hear them- a great improvement.
My point is that by having multiple machines at the different fan speeds they might produce a canceling anti-noise and the whole setup would be less loud (at least this seemed to happen in my case).

Was he arrested only because of selling bitcoins for cash ?

I know its Seems Crazy But im Just Asking  I heard Some guys Saying that it was created by Satoshi Nakamoto WTF??

http://liopal.com (The Game)

How will MtGox users be repaid if the bitcoins are gone? In fiat?

Whether "high frequency" trading should be considered "insider" trading is a philosophical debate that depends a lot on what you mean by "insider" and what it is that you don't like about "insider trading".  I'm not going to get into such a philosophical debate at the moment (and I'm not going to indicate in this post which side of the debate I tend to agree with more).

However, when it comes to the specific type of "insider trading" I'm talking about where the exchange itself can easily take advantage with 0 risk, I'm specifically talking about using knowledge about orders that are being added to the order book before those orders are public knowledge.  With "high frequency" trading, the traders know information faster than those that aren't a selected participant, but they still don't know the information before it is in the order book.

The exchange however receives a request to add an order to the order book from a user.  At this point, their software knows about this order (and other orders) that WILL BE a part of the order book in a moment, but isn't a part of the order book yet.  This puts them in a position to make automatic trading decisions that guarantee a risk free profit.  They can effectively roll back time and place their orders before (or after) the orders that are being added to the order book, making sure that the orders are filled in a specific order that guarantees that they come out ahead with no risk to themselves at all.

As an extremely simple example:

Albert places a BUY order for 10 BTC at $250 each ($2500 order).
A fraction of a second later, Bob places a SELL order for 10 BTC at $249 each ($2490 order).

Under normal circumstances Albert's BUY order enters the order book, then Bob's SELL order fills Albert's BUY order.  Albert gains 10 BTC from Bob, and Bob gains $2500 BTC from Albert. The exchange gets a small fee from both of them for maintaining the order book and trading engine.

Under circumstances where the exchange is engaging in "insider trading", Albert's BUY order is held in memory for a fraction of a second before being added to the order book.  The software sees Bob's order coming in and holds that in memory as well.  The exchange then adds Bob's transaction to the order book first, and inserts their own BUY order to buy all 10 BTC from Bob at $249.  They then allow Albert's order into the order book and immediately following it they add their own order to SELL 10 BTC at $250.  Now Albert has received his 10 BTC, and paid $2500 for them, but Bob only received $2490.  The remaining $10 goes to the exchange completely risk free since they knew that both transactions were entering the order book and could arrange them to their own benefit.  Then on top of that, the exchange gets a small fee from both of them.

With many transactions being added to the order book, this process can be repeated all day long completely automated.  The exchange can essentially take money out of the pockets of the people placing market orders without the users ever realizing it.

I feel like when Bill Gates says these things it shows he doesn't have a very deep understanding of Bitcoin as a protocol. But to give him some credit, he has come a long ways in the past month or two, so I just tell myself that he is still in the learning curve. I think he will get it more and more, including the answers to his concerns.

On the other hand, I feel like for him to be the richest man on Earth and such a huge visionary and pioneer, his complaints are incredibly short-sighted for him not to see the full potential.

He seems to think of Bitcoin as only a high level layer when he names these issues, when in fact it's a protocol which is programmable. All three of those complaints can be resolved by software being implemented to address these points.

 His complaints are what the uninformed complain about. Yes they are legitimate issues presently, but they can easily be overcome. He seems to think they are complete stops when they are not at all.

As one example, think of all the possible choices of financial intermediaries that will be developed to enable customer safety for transactions reversals. This CAN be implemented and will be. It doesn't have to be also. That's the beauty of Bitcoin. You have the power to do whatever you want with it. Why can't he see this?

For the first one. Gotta agree, normal people (non-technology) wont be investing in Bitcoin. Most of them are afraid for the rapid changes in the exchange rate. And.. some of them can't understand how Bitcoin work. Unless Bitcoin is value stable, else, people wont be investing in it.

really?  i'd like to think so but not seen enough evidence yet of real involvement in buying

I've heard of this happening too. A few bank tellers have asked me what I was saving for when I've put money in to my savings account before (though I just took this to be smalltalk even if it was none of their business).

You've had a pimple for 11 months? Really should have that checked out by a dermatologist. 

I agree, some people has just allowed this bitcoin craze to drive them to insanity.

But was it clear at the time SR was operating? If there was no official guidance from authorities on how to treat bitcoin, the guy had every right to sell it just as any other asset (since it wasn't officially recognised as currency or financial instrument).

Actually at what point do you need MT license for selling BTC? Is there any trading threshold? Can you legally sell BTC1 for cash, as one-time sell, not a business activity?