OK, well I'll mark that one off my Bucket List now...

OK, so then call it a pump-and-dump scam. Or call it a mania. But don't call it a Ponzi scheme, because it isn't. We aren't denying the bad aspects of Bitcoin; we're bemoaning your misuse of a well-defined term.

No, he's making fun of the fact that the author didn't just use 'cryptocurrency' as the general word.

was Inevitable.

Focusing on the premature deaths that were avoided during the prior century is like worrying about a nose bleed while your wrists are slashed. The real focus should be on the probable extinctions to come, as a consequence of the positive feedback loop that we are sparking. I invite you to read the following for more details.
https://plus.google.com/+YonatanZunger/posts/SgzQU5DM3LQ

I liked your counterpoint about AT&T... and although the GP didn't really have a point, they were referring to the original purpose of mtgox.com, as evidenced by The Wayback Machine's snapshop of it from 2007: http://web.archive.org/web/20070817170606/http://mtgox.com/gwt/mtgox.php

Companies are not looking to maximize price. They are looking to maximize the area of the rectangle defined by Price times Volume. If they think the area of that rectangle will be larger at a smaller price, then they would sell at that smaller price.
Now imagine that your company has correctly identified that pricing sweetspot, but some of your product is partially defective, though still useful. You cannot sell it at that same ideal price as the fully-featured product. So, you necessarily sell it at some discount.

This is precisely the kind of story that was considered slashdot's raison d'être in 1997... you know, news for nerds?

Easy, 60mph. That's one of the more psychologically prominent ones (another being 100mph == 160km/h). Also, your car's speedometer likely lists both scales, so all you have to do is look at the inner scale instead of the bigger, outer one.
I do recognize you were being funny.

Dude, I get it. This and other Kickstarters aren't typical venture-capital investments. In fact, I think that is by design; I think that in the U.S., there are regulatory issues with crowd-funding venture capital, and so Kickstarter is intentionally structured this way.
I see below where you replied to an AC with:

But buying an item at a discount isn't an investment. It's like coming home from the mall with 20 shirts you didn't intend to buy and saying "but I saved money, they were on sale!"

That is not what happened in the case of Pebble. What happened is: I ponied up $110 in a "pledge" (read: angel investment,) for what amounted to a 0.001% stake. Then, prior to the first VC round, the future value of my equity was discounted back to present value, and paid to me in the currency of a Pebble watch, currently valued at $150.

Yes, I am saying the above somewhat tongue-in-cheek. But my primary point is: the only reason it is done this way is to work around regulatory issues.

I think what the OP meant was: because the original transmission was over https, he feels confident in discounting the possibility of an eavesdropper, as opposed to the company just being lax and/or promiscuous with his information.

I did get a tiny part of the profits... in the form of a 27% discount on the smartwatch.

Kickstarters are not angel investors. Usually-- and this was the case with Pebble-- Kickstarters are prepaying for the device, and those prepayments fund development and initial manufacturing. And, the amount raised through Kickstarter was $10M, not $15M. (The latter is the figure that the VC is adding.)
Yes, I was a Kickstarter backer for Pebble. And, I received mine, at the stated discount. So I got my expected ROI.

Kickstarters are not angel investors. Usually-- and this was the case with Pebble-- Kickstarters are prepaying for the device, and those prepayments fund development and initial manufacturing.
Yes, I was a Kickstarter backer for Pebble. And, I received mine, at the stated discount. So I got my expected ROI.

Yes... it is a hapax legomenon.