If you have enough information to satisfactorily "report your lost Bitcoin", then you have the bitcoin itself.
For a bad analogy, think about a 20 dollar bill. You can't go into a bank and say "I a 20 dollar bill, can I have another 20?" and expect success. If you go into the bank and say "I lost a 20 dollar bill and I remember the serial number, can I have another 20?" you still won't succeed. If you could somehow go into the bank and say "I lost a 20 dollar bill and I remember the serial number, and I can prove that it is mine, and I can prove that I haven't already spent it, and that no-one else can spend it" then maybe you'd have a chance.
Once you can do all of that, you have enough information to "report your bitcoin lost"... but that means that you have enough information to rebuild your bitcoin.
didn't microsoft learn its lesson yet about ambiguating the desktop and tablet market spaces with its metrosexual user interface?
Was it any more successful for Ubuntu when they went to Unity?
from the transcript
one of our next app is Bargument which allows you to create a Wikipedia page that is completely fake, to prove arguments at bars, so that you are right and the other person is wrong
making it easier to add crap to Wikipedia is not being a good netizen.
Once satisfied with the results, a scientist can save her invention to a file, click the order button and ship the virtual creature’s specs to a DNA synthesizing lab such as GenScript or GeneArt, which can assemble actual physical DNA based on the specs. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/02/27/programming-life-with-click-mouse/#ixzz2M8XF9cfu
So my question is: are the DNA synthesizing labs regulated? Will they just synthesize anything that is submitted, or is there some scrutiny? And what is the risk if they do synthesize something bad? What is the amount of effort needed to weaponize even dangerous DNA? If it is relatively easy, then regulation of the synthesizing labs is well advised.