reply to doctor_nix:
Overtime, as the difficulty goes up and up, everyone except for a few mega operations will be small scale. Inevitably, just like you and me, they will require some form of distributed mining. As an open source product, you cannot stop innovation, and pools such as deepbit are innovative and are serving a vital function.
At the same time, they also pose an incredible risk to the future security of the currency. If any single entity can control 50% or more of bitcoin hash power, and as the value of bitcoins continues to grow, this will represent a severe risk, not only to the security of the currency but to those that use it. If we reach our goal in forming a respected world currency, a crash would be disastrous. If bitcoins are to grow, their future security needs to be certain (outside of the encryption algorithm aspect).
At the same time, no one would ever have the authority to declare that deepbit cannot exist, or even control 50% of the market share, hell maybe in the future people will vote for who controls their money with where they place their bitcoin power, and maybe this is how banking authorities will be selected.
What I am proposing is that we find a way to ensure that bitcoins, in their default form, are not reliant on a larger institution of any kind. In order for this to happen, there needs to be a way for groups of users to share resources to generate coins, without the reliance on a central authority. This needs to be done through overlaying peer-to-peer networks.