One key difference is that you can claim bank accounts, investment portfolios, 401k's with any number of personal identity information.  Certainly the argument can be made that the wallet IS your personal identification and therefor the difference is that you are in sole possession and have sole responsibility for it whereas typical personal identification is the records of your government though witness of your peers will sometimes suffice if there is a failure of government records.  I suppose I would concede that those are fairly complimentary though there are some differences.

Really I am being belligerent and actually agree with you.  I just like to try to think sideways.

I cannot post anywhere except newbies right now but I wanted to hear other opinions about this matter.

In many cases the law refers to possession.  I think a good argument could be made that you don't actually possess bitcoin.  I don't think you would win that argument so as to convince other people (which is the most important thing when talking about law) but it is an idea none the less.

Using bitcoin really requires 2 things.  You need the blockchain.  Everyone has the blockchain and with the exception of latest transactions that have not reached you yet, everyone has the same blockchain.  You also need a wallet which could be construed as merely a unique tool for interpreting the blockchain.  The bitcoin you are assumed to possess are actually in the blockchain and really are in the possession of everyone who has an active bitcoin client.  If your wallet is destroyed, the bitcoin you had access to theoretically still exist in the blockchain.  For practical purposes they are lost but nothing changed about the blockchain which technically keeps track of all the bitcoin.  Does the ability to manipulate something mean you have possession of it.  Does it make it possession because you are theoretically the only person that can manipulate something?  Does having the blockchain mean I am in possession of all bitcoin?

Again, I don't think I would be able to convince a court that I never had possession of bitcoin and there may actually be law written to cover things like this.  But the philosophical part of me still wants to argue this.

Does anyone else get tired of office mates coming to you every other month with smiles and their big news that "bitcoin was hacked"?  Usually they are talking about some individual case of a break in or security breach.  Then you have to spend half an hour explaining to them how bitcoin works again which is why your initial reaction was "that's highly unlikely".

Sometimes I fret over how difficult it can be to explain bitcoin, but then I remember how difficult it is to understand the regular monetary system as well.

I wanted to put down a couple of thoughts on the economics of the SatoshiDice investment and see if there are any flaws in my thinking.

1. Buying stock in SatoshiDice is an excellent hedge against bitcoin losing value.
  a) If bitcoin loses value people should be betting the same real world money which means they are betting more bitcoin.  That means dividends would go up.  Currently the dividend is about 20% annual based on the current price.  If there are more dividends the value of the stock should rise and your real world value investment should remain stable.

2. Buying stock in SatoshiDice means that your investment no longer sees gains if bitcoin goes up in value.
  a) Again, people are betting the same real world money.  If value goes up that means betting less bitcoin.  Dividend percentage goes down against value and therefor the value of the stock would also go down.  I don't think you lose the real world value of your investment, but you definitely lose out on gains.

Thoughts, suggestions?  It is different thinking about investment with a deflationary currency.

Not sure he released all information for all years.  He cannot pay the bounty or it would be obvious he is covering up something.  It would be worse for him to pay the bounty unless the returns have horrible information that is also beyond belief.  I personally hope the bounty is not paid and the documents are released.  That would be more interesting than other outcomes.

Difficulty is based on the speculative prices compared with electricity costs.  I think in December there will be a combination of bitcoin price increase and difficulty decrease but we will not see prices double or difficulty halve.  Supply dry up will make sure a price increase happens.  Unfortunately this is a deflationary currency and people who expect the price to go up are less willing to give up their coin now which is prematurely floating prices up.

Long time lurker, long time miner.  I do not know everything about bitcoin but I know enough to guide people past the marketing rhetoric on both sides of the bitcoin argument.  Hope to get a junior member designation soon and this is the place to start.