I did.

In my, further totally worthless, opinion the same goes for the USD and the EUR.

1. People that do illegal things, like drug dealers, use dollars as an exchange.

2. Traders play the dollar market to try and make a quick buck.

3. Maybe they're not so bad at math, but accept some losses in dollars for helping create a 'greater good', i.e. a non-centrally controlled currency.

The deflation part also concerns me a bit, but that will be resolved as soon as all bitcoins have been minted. Then we'll see what's the reality with bitcoins.

Every currency has both
1. an objective (intrinsic) value,
2. a subjective (speculative) value.
The objective value of the dollar is zero, that of the bitcion is the energy put in generating it, that of gold is the gold itself.
That would make me prefer gold over bitcoin over dollar.

Maybe we should call it an 'AVM': Automatic (bitcoin) Vending Machine?

I'm not sure.
Governments can...
- order ISPs to close bitcoin-specific ports
- close down the exchanges
- make transactions illegal
- insert all kinds of tyrannical measures they can take in order to protect the interests of the private banks (and of their--the private banks', that is--central banks).
- oh, and they (especially US/NATO) can bomb the hell out of countries that continue supporting transactions in bitcoin.

By then the situation will be back to what it was before bitcoins were used.

4) battery low
5) try to get your money back :)

Journalists nowadays are for telling you what lie to believe, not to find out the truth.

Yes, and the people have accepted that process of corruption of power for so long now, that they are filled with fear for the government (which indicates a state of tyranny), instead that the government fears the people (which would have meant democracy).
I think it was Jack Otto who said: "The land will only be 'of the free' for as long as it's the home of the brave."

The more the government is flexing its muscles in civic areas, the more the civilians should cling to the second amendment.
And requiring licensing to have the right to bear arms *is* already the infringement of a right that 'should not be infringed upon'.

I thought the constitution explicitly prohibits the military to act in civil areas?

I would only be 'as bad as them' if I'd pressed her to suicide. Which I don't.
I just wish she would do it.

It is already well known that during the past 100 years, more people have died from the hands of their own government, than from war and/or terrorists.

Awesome!

me too!

US lawmakers don't even read the laws they are voting for.