What is Stefan Thomas doing with JS?

Inquiring minds want to know!

Exactly, there are two ways to go about changing fiat currencies to Bitcoin. Follow the regulations and appease the government  or risk getting shut down.
Bitcoin exchanges being shut down doesn't help anyone. If you want to buy Bitcoins anonymously there are other methods. 
We will let everyone know before we make additional changes.

Jered

The answer is no. However, since there are lots and lots of such traders someone will - but it's not due to skill but simply chance.

Yes! The point is that so far there's no trader ever that has outperformed chance, that is, has been trading at a statistically significant level that cannot just be explained with being one out of all traders in existence.

If someone claims to be such a trader, and in addition claims to have a method behind it, that will result in an instant Nobel Prize.

Because being religious instantly means you hate freedom and want everyone to obey the will of god or else?

Who gives a shit if he is religious and anti abortion? You have to be pretty far removed from reality to think this issues are important when choosing who to vote for.

1) Did you actually read the convo I had opened at TED?

2) If so, how could you possibly have perceived that as "spammy"??

The convo was totally appropriate, given TED's audience and demographics. The entire thesis was how Bitcoin may change economic relationships in poor countries. I understand some on these forums have spammed promotion... but I don't, and this wasn't.

I'm not arguing that but under a banned situation with reasonably difficult means to access the plain jane's and average joe's would not be in the market at a level sufficient to build it up as a currency.  The only real defense is to give it a good name and mass adoption before this happens and hope that if it does happen the the users I am talking about don't flee on mass and plummet the value of the currency but again this would be isolated to only the countries that did this so likely this would be done on a more global cooperative banning like say the major western and eastern countries seeking to "save" their currencies.  Putting up say tradehill in some other country alone would not work for the average user because the governments that ban it could fairly easily monitor traffic via the net or even postal to the new tradehill location and then you would get into needing proxies and other intermediaries and that is were the average consumer would find it more burdensome than what it is worth.

Starting to have people see charitable contribution is a positive move toward the defense of cryptocurrency, and mass adoption is the next since it becomes that much more difficult for a government to ban the currency in a "good" light to it's citizens, right now the easy justification is the view that this currency is for money launderers and the black market and banning it under those typical uses would be much more easy for the government than banning an "honest" economy for the currency.

Any thing other than seeing this obvious fact is just speculation, sure in countries where it is banned wont eliminate it but it would have a notable impact to the value and adoption of the currency is all I am saying.  If you look at some other posts I made about this rough topic you will see that I am more inclined to see that positive legislation is more likely to occur than negative however.  Economies that are more isolated and in need of much more import based trade are likely to see cryptocurrency since it helps to reduce the impact to currency exchange for those countries (ie. Australia, New Zealand), additionally if "Wall Street" picks up on the trade/investment potential of cryptocurrency (Ruxum is a very good example of this starting to happen), then you would likely see governments not trying to ban it but to tax it just like any other forex or stock/mutual fund investment.

No, just as I mentioned, a government(s) could ban the local exchanges and then monitor postal and financial wire transfers from the other known ones, no this would not entirely shut down the exchange of cryptocurrency but it would essentially shut it down for the average joe and plain jane consumers of the system and those are the ones needed to establish a real economy and not a black market play currency.

You can outlaw the exchange of cryptocurrency, then businesses would be breaking the law in the country that does this including monetary exchanges.  From that point a government could monitor postal and wire transfers to/from known foreign exchanges.  After that essentially a country that has done this has limited the use of the currency to nearly untraceable person to person transfers and already illegal/underground businesses.  It would make the currency in that country nearly useless.  But yes a favorable PR movement to push past the stigma that bitcoin is the currency of money launderers and the illegal drug trade could only be beneficial, even more so is to donate the actual coin to them and someone help set them up a secure cryptocurrency donation system rather than have a 3rd party receive and then exchange to fiat currency.

I think the main advantage here is that you can define how much do you want to keep in cold storage. Let's say you deposit 1000 coins at MtGox. If they get hacked, how much will you loose? You never know...

The other advantage is that flexcoin offers monthly "discounts" (which is basically interest). The more you save, the more you earn.

What is this based on?

Not as a skeptical question, but since you as a big pool op. might have better understanding of the market, statistics etc.
(I find $30 perfectly logical in the long term, just would like to know the reasoning)

Kind of like how the only people who had a problem with Nazis killing people were the people being killed.