CUDA came in November 2006.

Of course it hasn't, because if it did then the green lines wouldn't be where they are now. Even if the price falls to 0.01 all you need to do is add older trades and wait until it recovers to 0.011 to make the trend be up.

Buffett would also advice you to not speculate in something that will only make you money if someone will pay you more for it later.

But your *feelings* about what the price should be are? People were arguing in pretty much exactly the same way about the $10 "limit" when the price had fallen to $12-13. Good luck with your investments, you'll need it.

Regarding the mining cost it truly is irrelevant. The same number of coins will be mined no matter how many is mining. The hashing power will just scale down with the price.

The price has already fallen 80% from the top, so assuming it's 98% certain it won't fall another 25% is wildly optimistic and naive. Bitcoin is backed by nothing, so there is no particular price point that can be said to be good or bad for buying or selling.

Except it's tuesday, and the price keeps falling. That weekend excuse got old a long time ago. Traders have been aware of it for months, so the price goes up in the weekend about as often as it goes down.

I think your audience will find it helpful if you also include a link to this guide: http://www.digitalfox.com/digitalfox/johnf-ingkerry/foilhat.htm

More likely he just wanted to test if people here will fall for even the most obvious trolling.

I don't think there's any real evidence that Bruce actually lost those 25 000 BTCs, other than him claiming it. He also said he's reported it to the FBI, but it turns not that may not be the case either. That could indicate that he's just lying about loosing BTCs to make people feel sorry for him instead of suspecting him of being involved with MyBitcoin.

It's not, though. The other currencies are too small to make much of an impact, so most of the volatility comes from mood swings.

That's not what the price of the currency means. The fact that the market cap of Bitcoin is currently about $60 million does not mean that there are $60M USD "sloshing around" in the Bitcoin community. All it takes to arrive at that market cap is one person with $1 who wants bitcoins and nobody with bitcoins willing to sell for less than 8.60. The crash comes because a large portion of the bitcoin owners gets less optimistic and want to sell. Then they'll start to fight for whatever amount of dollars that is available by undercutting each other.

I invite you to try to prove with logic that I can't prove it.

Some times (several times each day) it hangs for maybe 20-30 seconds before the page suddenly loads, so I don't think it's because of the backup. If it's possible it might be a good idea to run it with ionice -c 3, though.

Why has the entire thread about Eligius putting prayers in the bitcoin chain been deleted? It was here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38007

You guys are just stupid. If your had just shut up or at least kept your bragging of how profitable it is and your silly attempts at justifying pool jumping to this thread you could have gotten away with it for a while longer. Now you're even doing it in the pool's threads. That has of course pissed off the miners who wasn't aware of what is going on, putting even more pressure on the pool owners to protect the more loyal users.

Unfortunately, you should only do that if you really want to hurt the pool. Assuming it uses the same rounds for both proportional and PPS it will receive less than it pays you for the shares when the block is finally solved. The PPS part only averages out right for the pool owner when the PPS users put at least the same hashing power in short rounds as in long.

Based on your assumptions about corporations who support republicans or democrats this statement may seem a bit inconsistent. To clarify, this is of course only the case when they support the guy you like?

The time stamp on blocks solved by Eligius is at least 6 minutes into the future. I recommend you start syncing the time using ntp.

That just supports my statement. Your claim that it "destroys" society is clearly wrong, because the most well regulated countries are also the richest. Too many rules can create unnecessary obstacles, but the uncertainty a lack of laws creates is just as bad.

Anyway, I realize your ideology is your religion, so I'll stop wasting our time discussing this now.

Not directly, but it is the implication of you statement unless you live in some alternative world where people just stop accumulating wealth when they're "rich enough" (by whatever your standards may be).

You are the first person I've seen who claims that a system which favors heredity over merit reduces the concentration of wealth. Interesting theory...