There is a price already, 2.2293 btc per oz of gold

By trying to say you backed btc with gold, the scale is set to 21million per oz.    So instead of increasing the credibility of bitcoin, it now becomes like sand on a beach.    

     In a free market bitcoin must have a price/risk comparable to other assets, arbitrage makes this true of almost anything.    We cant just 'make it so' without resorting to the stupidity of communist party (or Nixon) price fixes and what that really means is less business is done.   In your case you are probably proposing that only you can give this exchange, because you undercut all other exchanges with your cheap price then business is restricted I think would be the effect.  
I think it would be so much more complicated and harder to do.   The immediate effect of every exchange offering this swap to gold would drop btc prices massively I think.  Exchange rates are not fixed without further problems

Peer to peer cryptography wont mix with gold, that value cannot be transmitted or codified

Volume of all major exchanges would be useful information to have.  Mt gox led to an inaccurate perspective so it would be best to have some average or weighting to trade done, that would help improve prediction most likely

NL, the only thing i'd say about your arguments above is that i'd like to see gubmint play a "more" active role by loosening the choke points and regs that are restricting Bitcoin's free trade at the moment.  there is no doubt in my mind that Bitcoin would be much more widespread by now if they weren't interfering.

the other thing is that until the gubmint is willing to tie their fiat currency emission to Bitcoin, such as perhaps M1 to 21m BTC, they will continue to inflate the USD which is bad for everyone.  this has to stop.

"Backing" is a kind of awkward hack that attempts to limit the production of currency.

It never really worked in the first place, and it's completely unnecessary now that we can just use math to limit the supply of the currency.

Bitccoin is not backed by gold so we don't get #2.

This is not a true gold standard.  If it were, then a fixed amount of bitcoin would be directly redeemable for a fixed amount of gold.  This cannot exist in a trusless environment.  What you speak of are just market rates.  By your logic, the Argentinian peso is backed by gold.

Gold and silver cannot be sent over the internet.  Period.  All you can do is send an IOU for gold or silver over the internet, which requires third party trust.  Bitcoin gives us 1 and 3 but not 2.  All 3 cannot exist simultaneously.  Unless someone can make all 3 happen at the same time, then bitcoin is our best option.

what you say usually makes sense to me. Not this time. Care to elaborate what you mean?
 

The problem I have with gold bugs who advocate a gold backed currency such as Rickards and Schiff is that gold backed currency has been tried and failed. It failed because of a central point of failure and in the US this central point of failure is the federal reserve and it failed to maintain a dollar peg to gold.  Einstein's definition of insanity is "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result."  By that definition, all gold bugs who want a gold backed currency are insane because it has been tried and failed miserably.  Don't try it again.  Bitcoiners are the sane ones for trying something different.

A gold backed digital currency would be great but these three conditions cannot exist simultaneously for money:
1.  Digital
2.  Backed by gold
3.  No third party risk (no central point of failure - decentralized)

The next best thing is to have 1 and 3 exist simultaneously, which leaves us with bitcoin.

He tried something, he got caught,now he owes 400 BTC and is trying to refocus the discussion away from that fact.

The difference is a 51% attack on the p2pool chain would be immediately obvious to all miners monitoring it - p2pool finds a block, but no payment is made since the attacker has substituted their own btc addresses into the sharechain, instead of the legitimate miners.

In this event, I imagine miners would just jump ship, if a better solution isn't implemented by then. Until then, though, it still has its advantages.

Come on guys. When you try to recover some password using the pywallet dump, you just send him a encrypted key with no funds, so he can recovered the password but recovers a private key with no funds. Thats 100% trustless.

What an horrible way to spend the taxpayer money against him  I hope every country who have this stupidity will stop, it's fascism.

Drug and fat people is my impression.

Pointing to the smartphone, Kurzweil says, devices like the iPhone are 100,000 times smaller than the computer that he used as an MIT student. "It is also several thousand times more powerful," he says. "It is a million times cheaper. That is a several billion-fold increase in price performance." Technology is being reduced at a rate of "100,000 in 3-D volume per decade," says Kurzweil. "That is another predictable exponential trajectory, so computers of this capability will be blood-cell size in 2030.

We're about 3 months ahead of you here.