For sure you don't need 5.25 million coins if people are just downloading Kiba's art or having the occasional game of poker. So there's no doubt that the price of a bitcoin already "factors in" some allowance for the future utility of the coin.

If that utility doesn't eventuate, bitcoin might fail. However, maybe "being a long-term store of value" is already sufficient utility to ensure the success of Bitcoin, even if people aren't buying loaves of bread with it.

Anyway, if it gets to the point where phone-to-phone transactions are safe and straightforward, then I think there's no stopping Bitcoin from that point onwards.

Getting onto this list is difficult for someone who is selling 6 or 12 month contracts, because performance cannot be properly judged for another 6 or 12 months.

One of the things I do before deciding whether or not to trade with someone is to check out their prior posts, to work out what kind of "mindset" they have. Do they respect private property, do they respect contracts, do they respect other people, what is their attitude towards money and debt, etc.

Vladimir passes with flying colors.

Recognizing your address is worse.

Being in the Top 100 list might even be considered a good thing, except that you've blown your anonymity by having your address in your signature, Mr BTC9364.73.

Those 100 high-flying addresses account for 1754088 coins, which is 35% of all coins generated to date.

I would say it the other way: "Moon is bitcoin-compliant"

Why does the "Bitcoins produced over time" chart go above 21,000,000 in 2046?

Harry Browne died in 2006. He published "How I found freedom in an unfree world" in 1973.

It's that. One person can't be expected to know everything. He knows the stuff he specializes in. He's not even an open source guy. It's Windows for him.

But I don't criticize someone for a lack of knowledge. If he understood open source, and if he understood bitcoin, I'm sure he'd approve of them.

Block 105000 has just been generated. That's one-quarter of the way to the eventual total of 21,000,000 bitcoins.

According to bitcoin watch, the 5.25 million BTC generated so far are valued at $2.27 million, or 1204 ounces of gold.

Way to go!

If I could count on having reasonable health in my old age, I would not want to be rich in anything.

But it would be nice to have some savings to use for health care in my old age if necessary.

OK, I see, the joke is on me. Touché!

I know (and often use) the links browser, but I didn't know w3m.

Grondilu, I'm not sure what you were expecting, when the preview shows everything except for two small rectangles. It's unusual, but not erotic.

You're getting boring, gene.

Me too.

It took me 15 years to understand the merits of Libertarianism, then another 35 to understand the merits of Voluntarism. I'm a slow learner.

...with a good Public Relations Department.

Most people here appreciate the distinction between price deflation and monetary deflation. But the consumer doesn't care about the difference.

Suppose you want to buy a new cellphone which costs $100. You have $200, which also needs to cover your expenses for the rest of the month, which you estimate at $100.

If you think there will be price inflation, $100 may not be enough to cover your expenses for the rest of the month. With prices going up, you might need $120 for the rest of the month. So maybe you won't buy the phone this month. Or maybe you'll buy a cheaper one for $80.

If you think there will be price deflation, you'll happily buy the phone because you might only need to use $80 of your remaining $100 for your expenses for the rest of the month. If you're not a cautious type, you might even splash out on a $120 phone.

The consumer doesn't care whether the price inflation/deflation is due to monetary policy or due to technological change. That's not what they base their behavior on.

The "inflation is good" myth is promulgated by those who have gotten themselves into debt, and want their burden to be eased at the expense of those who haven't.

Most of us are not interested in Smith's market, which was required to be free and "fair", for a definition of "fair" that conflicts with "free".

We're interested in markets that are free of violence or the threat thereof. Nothing more, nothing less. As far as we're concerned, such markets also happen to be fair.

I would love to have one of these bitcoin heaters. It would boot directly into Bitcoin, and be shutdown simply by turning off the power. It would maybe have a handle attached for ease of transporting.

It should have solid state storage for robustness: probably just an internal USB socket that can take a 4GB USB flash drive (or maybe even two USB sockets in hot-swap RAID configuration for robustness and ease of backup).

Ideally it would look like this, but some of these ideas would work too.

Aah yes. To solve a problem: form a subcommittee with eight people, and let them have meetings for a year at the taxpayer's expense.

If the Fed system did collapse (and I don't think it will; it will just languish), it wouldn't be saved by a subcommittee (whose recommendations would probably include setting up further subcommittees).

Well no, you choose the GPU that gets least hot (for the same hash rate), because you want the maximum BTC payout per watt. If you have a GPU that generates the same number of blocks without becoming so hot, you simply use two of them in your heater.

If you wanted something that got really hot, you would stick with CPU mining.