I think you are the first one that made that argument.

Depending on the relations your country has to the one you're leaving for, they can still terrorize one with a flood of letters, or maybe even worse such as beginning to visit one's workplace and neighbors to make sure it is delivered.

It may seem like a no-win situation on both sides, but here's how I think this plays out:

The one suing:
They're making an example of someone, and scaring off other people due to their oh-so-effective tactic.
Case publicity, all they have to do is put some outrageous number on the paper and others will report on it.

The person getting sued:
He is eventually forced to sell off anything of value and live on what they consider to be a minimum standard of living.
His life is virtually wasted, because lets face it, you can't do anything when you've only got money for food, and if one gets a better job or similar, then they'll only take more and the person is still in the same situation.

The more important question that never pops up because talking about debt is such a taboo: Is it right to sentence someone to life in poverty and psychological abuse if they didn't cause anyone harm or emotional damage?. From a debt-based economy's perspective that's a definite yes. Profiting on debtors is just another business.

It sounds similar to huffingtonpost exclusively uses other newspaper's articles.

I think it implies curiosity and early speculation. They're claiming free money here, after all ...

Please refute with specific information.

I suspect you have an interest in making sure bitcoins succeed, or you're just like the 16 year old kids on forums that go and blindly defend potential scammers with ignorant comments; "Stop being paranoid, nobody will scam you without transparency, pffff, I know people I've seen on forums before would never do that since they're nice guys and you're a douche" etc..

The wealth accumulation is the most worrying part, for instance there's a transaction for 140k already, and add 8 zeros to that if the adoption trend goes viral. Then there are the mining pools, which effectively act as banks, only that you put your trust in some guy sitting on some couch. All kinds of strange things are happening in the pools, from roundings, opaque pool operation (You simply have to trust that the pool allocates you the right amount for your work, the pool operators even say this mockingly, ex. "But I'm goofing around for few week and I'm amazed with bitcoin idea, so I don't plan to steal anybody right now :-)." http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=1976.0), etc.. A currency system based on trust? Meh, I don't see it happening (But then there are really bad actors on youtube that get really famous, sometimes even because that they're so bad, so you never know).

Let's not forget the large botnets, they can easily be focused on directly stealing the bitcoins, with no sort of security system your bank might have.

They also speak a-lot about the limit on inflation, since only 21 million can be generated (It's unlikely they all will get generated as the difficulty increases exponentially, good luck hitting a hash smaller than 0x000000000 ... 0000100000000, or whatever the difficulty), but this means that those with let's say 5 million each, they will effectively be able to control the bitcoins' value.

And ofcourse the points you mention, such as what if some professional people decide to put in serious effort and money into finding a more equal system, and it ends up replacing bitcoins where many people have invested so much.

Look how well it goes for RIAA to prevent copying and counterfeiting.

64-bit linux version is also gone with the wind now at the release of firefox 4. (It is still available on nightly builds).

In fedora at least, I had to put the flash plugin in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins instead of /usr/lib64/mozilla/plugisn

Linux doesn't accelerate the ff windows either, you can see it in about:support at the bottom.

As a developer I'm sure you enjoy it, everyone has some obscure niches, but what about the users? Why do WE have to suffer? To the users, flash is dead.
It might not be slow in execution speed when doing some arithmetic, but flash is the only thing we really hate having to run on ANY device. Firefox, Symbian, Android, Maemo, Chrome, Windows, Linux, you name it, flash will crash it. (several times a day, and/or make it painful on each execution.).

The ONLY situations where a user will run flash instead of an alternative is when the user is either a) A computer beginner and can't tell the difference between slowdowns and a virus, b) There is no alternative non-flash app, and c) It doesn't say anywhere it is flash, before purchase. Almost any competent computer user that knows what flash is will try to avoid.

Even Adobe has given up on the flash runtime, and is neglecting it as evident by the snail-paced progress in fixing a few bugs here and there every few years.

They must have hired Microsoft web developers to do the job. Otherwise, we'd like to know which company did this so we can avoid them as they are simply incompetent.

In a bigger part of EU (Except for: Britain, Czech Republic, Hungary, Belgium, Ireland, Netherlands, Slovenia, Estonia, Norway, Malta and Spain), it isn't allowed to take a surcharge. Many stores are still tricking customers with the surcharge since it isn't widely known. After a google search I see that something similar is implemented in US states too: http://fso.cpasitesolutions.com/premium/le/06_le_ic/fg/fg-merchants.html#MORE:B

People DONT understand our positions. They understand things such as "privacy setting changed, all your friends are now visible". When normal people think of facebook privacy, they think SOME SETTING. The privacy settings on the website is NOT what the privacy discussion is all about. It's about the microphone between you and your acquentices, and the analysts working on it.