It may SEEM that way to you, but the data does not support your theory, it's a fraction the crime rate of other 1st world countries.

Incidents in the year 2010 per 100,000 population
Rape:
U.S. 27.3
UK (England and Wales) 28.8
Australia 88.4
Sweden 63.5

Assault
U.S. 250.9
U.K. (England and Wales) 664.4
Australia 766
Sweden 936.6
Scotland 1449.7
source: https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/statistics/crime.html

Steam shows what a good implementation of DRM can do. I can install steam and download and play my computers games anywhere I want to. Offline mode is available as well, although then the game is locked to that computer. Unlimited free copies don't work in games where there are hackers anyway. People actually complain about games being too cheap on steam because then a hacker will buy a couple copies.

Really, because GSM has bad encryption? I'm sure no one is close to you and listening to your signal.

Regardless of the encryption used, the telco has the key and just forwards the police unencrypted audio.

Actually that's my point, you want to be paid in dollars and prices to be in dollars, so bitcoin itself it not acting as the currency.

Also if it was going to be used long term, it would just encourage massive hoarding, it would be a guaranteed 10+ % interest rate. Same reason we can't use gold anymore.

Except all fiat currencies are deigned to expand at the same or a slightly higher rate than the exponential increase in GDP, thereby remaining flat or having low inflation. Bitcoin, by design, has an ultimate limited supply (high deflation, as has been seen already). This makes it impossible to ever use as money, because prices and wages are sticky.

This was figured out many many decades ago. This is why it's foolish to think bitcoin has a future, it's future was doomed by it's very design.

It would be a terrible thing yes. So your employees that gain skills and produce more woudn't get a wage increase, whereas many employees that produce the same as last year would need pay cuts every year. Minimum wage would need to go down, every year. And your argument would only have relevance if population growth was also zero. Not only will bitcoins grow at less than GDP growth, but they won't even match population growth, another huge problem with its design.

Sticky wages are addressed in many books, only radical gold advocates, and billionaires are for money like bitcoins or gold. This doesn't even address the issue that then bitcoin would be a great investment, so banks would stop loaning out money and hoarding would come into effect.

The gold standard advocates are the greedy, pro monopoly billionaires, not the liberal left wing groups that seem to want equality. Bitcoins design is an even more unfair (to the common people) money than gold is.

All the countries left the gold standard for a reason, and you can look at the history of the countries that tried keeping it.

I thought openvpn opened all the ports up for you

Fine, then bitcoin's deflation will be that of the growth in GDP. But the whole point of money is to keep pace with GDP growth because wages are sticky.

If you used bitcoins as money you'd have to give a pay cut to every employee every year, and that's why it can never be used as money.

It was flawed by design so it'll become worthless at some point. Probably when they just make a new bitcoin where the supply matches world GDP growth.

That's actually the problem with bitcoin, is that it's deflationary. This makes it completely useless as actual currency, unless of course you're a billionaire gold advocate that just wants to hoard it and become even richer.

There's no possible way to have a deflationary currency work, why do you think everyone gave up gold decades ago. If instead bitcoin's supply grew exponentially, it would have the possibility you mention. Unfortunately, it's demise was promised from the beginning with it's design flaw of limited supply.

The deflation rate has been about 50% for the last couple of years with bitcoin, but you're right it'll be in the teens or something in the future, still horrible. This is it's flaw by design and the reason I never invested. This is the same reason we don't use gold anymore, even though it's supply is still growing, but less than that of GDP growth. Any deflation, even a few percent, is unwanted in your money because it promotes hoarding and discourages lending. There's a reason why the billionaires promote the gold standard, it's so they can just stockpile gold and not bother investing. Any money used today grows exponentially, to match or outpace the growth of GDP. This is the entire point of money, it's not meant to be an investment, that just hurts the rest of the economy. Your iphone analogy is pointless, it has nothing at all to do with investment in new companies or the stickiness of wages, it's just a talking point made by gold advocates. The point of deflation being bad is that banks would just save your money, instead of loaning it out. If it was bitcoins with a 10% deflation rate, they'd have to make a 10% return just to break even. You're confusing personal finances with money in large markets, and you sound like every other gold advocate that's been bought and paid for.

did he really say "if get, they will use it" ?

Almost as stealthy as the way fox had horrible polling data.

You're actually less likely to vote if your candidate seems to be winning in your state, I don't know how he could be more wrong. This also ignores the fact that spending a large amount of money in others ways, like advertising, actually works.

People that use internet while driving or outside their house have a cell phone connection which is probably faster than poor wifi reception outside a house. I don't see the use at all at this point, it would have been useful 5 years ago.