"who is going to have an incentive to run miners?" Read faq first ask stupid questions later. When mining a block you are getting more than just the block reward, you also get transaction fees. These are voulountarily included with transaction. You can not include the fee, but then you are depending on a goodwill of someone to include your transaction in a new block. The idea is that as block rewards diminish and eventually(sometime next century?) go to zero - the transaction fees will replace them as the incentive. Amount of transaction fees you need to include for someone to include your transaction in a new block is pretty much self regulatory.

Only your second point is valid. First one doesnt apply because if you look at bitcoin as an investment vehicle, its the same as all the other, good old demand and supply mechanics apply to all investment vehicles the same, be it rocks or bitcoins. Last one doesnt apply because, well banks and investors dont really think much of bitcoin other than looking at this wierd newfangled thing with puzzlement. Only engieneers and programmers who actually bother to find out how it works say "hey this is something i have never seen before - interesting"

aye mate, thats why there is bitcoinlaundry(or 100 alternatives), have fun tracking that.

So easy to call for something, so hard to understand that solutions to problems like public key cryptography or totally decentralised currencies dont pop up all that often, or atleast they dont work all that often.

Coming up with a solution like this is like solving a never before solved math problem. You never know if or when someone will come up with a solution. Until someone does it you usually dont even know if its possible. Over the decades i wonder how many have figured "hey lets make my very own currency". If you look at the lack of success stories out there it should be painfully obvious that this is a very hard problem.

And please dont say "look at all the altcoins" - they are just bitcoin copies, differences only in design decisions, not in basic principles. Lets give respect where respect is due, bitcoin is not just a program, its a solution for a very hard problem that has never been solved before. Sure there will be improvements now that there is that first solution out there, but i wouldnt expect some entirely new solution to that same problem any time soon. And for truly anon cryptocurrency you would need a totally new solution.

You cant really build on bitcoin to make it truly anon. Its pseudoanon and if you use it correctly its anonymous enough. Cant really excpect for more because entire system depends on keeping track of every transaction ever - publically. You could centralize the ledger and keep contents secret, but really, that defeats the whole point.

"While far from a dictatorship"

While there is no obvious personality cult, i would argue based on legislative actions of usa (and usa actions outside domestic and international law) that usa already lives in a functional dictatorship

If you have time to not pay attention, fiddle with phone etc you probably shouldnt be in that meeting in the first place, if there is nothing you want to hear or say in the meeting, dont go. Meetings are so often pointless waste of time because people who are not even needed are asked to attend. Sometimes only part of the meeting concerns you, in that case only attend for this part.

With enough buck you can buy a google server farm. Theoretically 20 years ago you could have bought a computer with the capabilities of todays PC, only it would have been very large and very expensive.

Well richer parts of the word tend to have better traffic culture and you get to guess three times where most of the customer base will be for the fancy and probably very expensive self driving cars

Moores law applies to computer price vs capability. You can bet that the PC-s doing the control are not the bulk of the cost in that 150k$. Sure mass production cuts cost per unit, but it wont make it insignificant. Cutting 150k$ down to something reasonable is not going to be easy

Moores law is about price vs capability.

Labview is meant for a very specific environment and set of problems - what the name says, that is lab techs who are not really programmers setting up test and measurement setups. Its a right tool for that, and works pretty well for these kinds on problems in that kind of environment. Use it for anything else at your own risk. Remember to always have the right tool for the right job.

what you need is not a criminal lawyer, but a criminal lawyer

"You are [expletive] up my company," or, "If we fail, it will be because of you."

Every engineering failiure starts with an managment failiure

You really think anyone handling these chemicals failed to notice what happens when you dump it on your head? You really think nobody figured out that dumping that stuff on villages would kill and maim thousands and more? Sure they knew, obviously it was just decided that vietnamise civilian deaths weren't important. Only difference with syrian attack is scale, when usa commits to mass murder they dont stop with few thousands.

Assad(or someone else, who knows) uses sarine in Syria, resulting in few thousand casualityes - mass murder, world is screaming for blood!

USA uses "agent orange" in Vietnam, quoteing wikipedia for results:

And USA gets treated as last bastion of justice and freedom

Seems to me that chemical warfare is not the problem, but who is doing it.