Autumn 2012 felt the same as now. The infrastructure developed rapidly, adoption increased, the good news just kept flooding in and the price did not react at all. That was also after a long and terrible decline after the crazy 2011 bubble. Of course nobody knows what will happen but I would not be surprised by something similar to spring 2013. Interestingly, a widely held belief around here in 2010 was that if this thing takes off there will be bubbles, several of them.

I got this by email from denarium.com: "It's a horse standing on 2 legs "

Great! The Casascius coins are sorely missed. What is the map on the 1/10 coin?

Yes. In places where there are no formal property rights prospering economically is really hard. Now suddenly there is a cheap, objectively verifiable, incorruptible property ledger open for use by everybody. This could be huge.

10 bitcoin comes in to an address of a company. 2 of them are Soprano bitcoins. The company pays 10 suppliers 1 bitcoin each from this address. Where did the Soprano bitcoins go?

Transferring value by assigning it to new owners in a ledger has been done for thousands of years. Bitcoin is new because for the first time this can be done without a trusted ledger keeper. Technologically a centralised ledger is much more efficient. Bitcoin can compete because no real life ledger keepers can actually be trusted. They are too vulnerable to coercion and corruption.

According to the Reuters article these people want to use the less efficient Bitcoin technology and have in centrally controlled by vulnerable organisations, combining the worst of both worlds.

Diversifying enough to live decently if Bitcoin fails but no way 50%. If Bitcoin succeeds and becomes a stable currency it still makes a lot of sense to hold bitcoin. It would be a non-inflationary currency that grows in real value in step with general economic growth. That would make it the optimal investment as long as you don't have private information about other investments, as such information is the only way to beat the index (i.e. overall economic growth) on average.

And it was said. Over and over again. Year after year.

And don't forget the inflation rate keeps falling. It was about 50% yearly when many started to worry about this. Now it is 10%.

30%, but for no well thought out reason. It's just that about 30% of my income is in bitcoin and I don't spend most of it.

Yes, but it wouldn't be wasted. Say resistor wire with built-in mining hardware costs about the same as regular resistor wire and that 6% of electricity production goes to heating. Then all those 6% (instead of 3%) would be used for mining. No other mining would take place as it would be highly unprofitable. More power would be used for mining but used efficiently and at no cost to society.

I use it so often I felt compelled to give even though it's run by a bunch of spiteful high-functioning autists. So now I have. They wouldn't let me pay if I didn't fill out a form with name and address. I have no idea why.

It only means debt can't be settled with it against the creditor's will. Unless there is a contract saying it can. Debts can be settled in anything the parties agree on.

I just held during the whole 2011 bubble cycle. I agreed with the then already widespread opinion on this forum that if Bitcoin catches on (a huge if at the time) there would be several bubbles on the way up. At the same time I knew I had no particular talent for picking tops and bottoms.

If Satoshi dies then Bitcoin will be worth a lot more ... oh, so that's why he is anonymous.

At first I thought their shares were colored coins but it seems not.

Back in 2011 I passively watched the decline. At 2$ there were heavy doomsaying on this forum. I read forceful arguments that nothing would prevent a further drop to 1$ and below. For the first time I felt a serious temptation to sell bitcoin to be able to double them at 1$.

A few days ago at 350$ I for the first time calculated at what price I would really be hurt if it continued falling.

Just another piece of data.

Zerohedge posted the actual report in their article about it.

Oh, no! Prices that vary with shifts in demand! When varying demand with prices set by a central planning authority has historically been such a smashing success. How will that ever work?

This explanation would make the actions of MtGox not criminal but it doesn't hold up. No problem in their handling of malleability can empty their cold storages of hundreds of thousands of bitcoins.

Indeed. What took them so long? The untapped demand ought to be huge. This could bootstrap Bitcoin in a lot of places that are both sexually and financially repressed, where it is sorely needed.