False.

Edit: (This can be true to some extent, but only as a result of lag. The difficulty will adjust every 2016 blocks to try to allow 6 blocks found per hour. The network can outpace it.)

One is tough (even an approximation). Two has been done, I don't have a link handy, perhaps someone does or maybe a search of the forums would lead to it.

Can you show me how difficulty affects price?

Whether you consider it risk or not, they were necessary. Would you be looking at Bitcoin right now if it was only trading for .001 USD and there were a grand total of 2 websites that mention it? Probably not.

And if you would be, you would be an early adopter, and people like you would be complaining about people like you simply because you saw a worthwhile project and decided to invest your time into it.

I want to continue to talk with you, but since you don't want to elaborate, I would be refuting my own assumptions.

How do either of those result in price stability?

How?

Tell me which single point you can remove to bring the entire thing to a halt.

I haven't seen anyone post a sizable amount yet! Well... maybe "over 9000" is a decent amount.

Err... MtGox which is making far, far more than your 33.64 USD every day decided they needed the extra income. So they risked their reputation (and far, far greater daily income) and decided to take your 33.64... 

I suggest you practice some patience, not all transfers are as quick and painless as the Bitcoin transfers you've become accustomed to.

I feel very disappointed by how quickly people yell scam.

I do hope you take the time to fix this thread when it is resolved.

Would you be interested in Bitcoins if they were trading for .001 USD each and there were 2 websites that had any info about them? Probably not, but the early adopters were and that is why they are necessary. So if they manage to hold on to their coins until they are worth large sums of USD (no easy task), they deserve it, because here you are starting new threads about Bitcoins.

I think he is referring to the Assault Weapons Ban. (I also think there is some miscommunication here between what people are saying and what others think they are saying. It's difficult to follow with such short sentences that are open to interpretation. I don't think anyone is in actual disagreement here, but I could be wrong.)

You aren't increasing the total amount, just dividing it.

Imagine you have one pie.

You can cut it in half, and you have 2 pieces, but you still have the same amount of pie.

You can cut it in half again, and now you have 4 pieces, but you still have the same amount of pie.

The whole pie will always be worth 5 bucks. The pieces will be worth less, depending on how small you cut them.

All better now.

The real point would be a more robust network!

And the first thing that comes to mind is theft? Do you know what you are doing when you are "mining"?

Yes, yes. I see your statistics. Indeed those days were quite unlucky for BTCMine, but that certainly doesn't mean the operator is stealing. You simply have to look at the amount of blocks solved and the hash rate for that time frame to see that the low payout is due to poor luck.

Give half the password to the loved ones, put the other half in the SD box, safe, will, whatever.

I can't eat, drive, fly, sail, surf, fish, hunt, camp, take shelter with, play music on, do computations with, fertilize my lawn with, sleep on, read, watch or make love to my Bitcoins.

You are the fellow who doesn't understand variance, or the benefits of reducing memory frequency. So, I'm going to have to ask you to elaborate on this statement, because it really doesn't make any sense to me, and I do love to learn new things.

How is this pool operator being "greedy with the reward system"?