Apparently even Charlie disagrees with you, since he is pleading guilty.

My whole family knows vaguely how to get them. I'm sure upon my death they'll do the necessary googling.

Limited supply is not a problem when you have near unlimited divisibility.

21 million doesn't sound like much, until you realize that the deflationary aspect of it will practically assure that it can fulfill the needs of the populace. If bitcoin theoretically continues to deflate, it will one day reach parity with the entire market cap of the dollar supply. That will be more than enough money for the planet. The divisibilty aspect further assures that usage of bitcoins (as well as its deflationary aspect) will not become cumbersome.

Fiat currencies continued existence relies on it being a suitable usecase to hold your assets in. Right now, faith in bitcoin is not yet strong enough to warrant this kind of reliance. But if it continues to survive, soon people will start paying more attention to the deflationary aspect than to the inherent risk of the system collapsing. Once people believe that the risk of bitcoin collapsing has the same risks as the internet collapsing, the usecase for fiat currencies to hold your assets in ceases to exist entirely.

The reason people cannot see fiat currency dissappearing, is because they see it in terms of how the general populace sees it. This is the wrong way to reason. The general populace is the last to see change coming and they will be the last to make the switch. You must look at it from the perspective of a whale and how whales affect change and markets.

Could a mining farm of this size be enough to create a 51% attack or is there really that much hashpower that this is nothing? Mind you I haven't really checked bitcoins current overall hashrate

Great, so insuring the offline wallets should be inexpensive and easy to do, right?

Agreed. I cannot believe so many "free market" people are against this idea. If this is what consumers want, someone should provide it, for a fee. More to the point, lending is important, especially when buying a house. Fractional reserves allows others to earn interest on their savings. Such a Bitcoin bank could still have proof of reserves, indicating how much money is being lent out vs. in reserve.
With Bitcoin, it is purely optional whether you work with such an institution. This is less easy in our current financial system.
Terminology may be bogging down a valid discussion. Central bank == insurance (as /u/PostOpticon pointed out) seems to be the crux of Mr. Mu's argument. I do agree the usage of "Central Bank" is inaccurate, but should not preclude a valid discussion.

I think you're wrong because Bitcoin can helps Africa's integration to the worldwide economy and  international monetary relations

I guess I need to continue

Why do you need such site? If you want help to promote new currency, you should donate BTC for it. IMO, it is best way

Electricity becomes money. And on most Islands you need a generator.

IMO, it is one of the most attractive reasons of  BTC using.

Great video!

Although I'm not a beginner, but I like to watch such good videos

Will materials from the meeting posted on the forum?

Is Bitcoin the Future of Money?
That's a great question

IMO, it is  future of course

IMO, Mt Gox needs to stay dead cos nobody will be confident to use an exchange with that name.

I find it strange and interesting at the same time. I like that event was organized in the run up to the Tallinn Bitcoin conference. It is good PR-decision.

Your idea makes sense

However, in this case, Bitcoin was to be developed by U.S. government agencies