jwesley

Fair enough, I see your point and completely agree that all currencies are based on belief. I guess that why I am all over the internet all day long trying to convince bitcoin is worth a shot.

Bitcoin doesn't need credibility. It just needs to work. Hype and speculators are a natural product of the energy gathering around the massive technical innovation and corresponding social movement that is Bitcoin.

People should have the freedom to make those security choices for themselves. People who are scared by the security issues of Bitcoin can avoid it, or only use it when the efficiency benefits are advantageous to them.

All the recent politically oriented attacks on Bitcoin are completely devoid of logical analysis and steeped in establishment dogma. They use name calling tactics like "play money" and "beenie babies fad" and scare tactics like "bubble" and "cesspool of criminal activity".

What none of these arguments ever address is the massive gains in economic efficiency that Bitcoin can clearly provide. It cuts out parasitic elements of the financial system that have grown like a giant parasite over the entire society.

The author claims that Bitcoin is steeped in nerd paternalism, but what about the epic paternalism of banks and regulators? Paternalism is their entire argument against Bitcoin, which basically amounts to "if people gain economic freedom, they will hurt themselves".

It's because Bitcoin is truly a massive political issue, with the potential to completely overhaul existing power dynamics. It is Establishment Leftism vs everyone else, and the battle lines are being drawn.

Bitcoin is a much different investment than stock in established companies or national currencies. It is much similar to high risk / high reward investments in uncertain technology ventures, like angel and VC investing. What it also has in common with those types of investments is the potential for very high returns that make taking on a high level of risk completely justified.

This type of risk profile lends itself to volatility. We don't get to see this with startup investments because their stock is rarely traded, and when it is it is done privately. The public doesn't get to see stock fluctuations in high tech companies until after the IPO, at which point the companies are clearly established and much of the volatility has been eliminated.

I would guess 500 or so. I think people still have a lot of enthusiasm, but camping out and taking care of all the practical details is exhausting and that is starting to show. I think it's extremely important that this movement gets moved online and finds a way to exist permanently. The camping at City Hall will eventually end, but I don't think that will be any type of failure of the movement. This is something that will take years to fully manifest itself.

It's hard to say. There were definitely representatives from every part of that spectrum. I think the important thing to grasp is that this movement transcends ideologies. The main commonality is that people believe the system is broken and want to break the stranglehold of monied interests over the government.

I was there mainly as a spectator, but did get on the mic for about a minute to share a few thoughts. My main goal was to converse with people on a individual level.

My personal goal is to wake people up to the brokenness of our political system and to inspire everyone to change it together. This is only a start but I'm very optimistic.

I will definitely attend more events, but more importantly, I plan on talking to people I know and care about to understand what they think and to help them see why I believe this is so important.

That's why Google is rolling out flat rate click pricing in many local verticals. They take the conversion data from advertisers using website optimizer and use it to help less sophisticated businesses compete against them.

You really need to refine the concept of exactly what your product does and the language you use to communicate that to users. Spending a few minutes on the site, I can tell it's for education but not much more than that. I get the idea you are trying to be all things to all people. You would probably be better off being the exact right fit for a specific segment of the market. By trying to be for businesses, educators, and amateurs you end up being not quite right for any of those groups. You should decide to be either for the mass consumer market or for businesses and educational institutions and develop your product and pricing accordingly.

You are disappointed in Mixergy because of your own short attention span? Why is that a problem with Mixergy. If you looked around you would also notice there are transcripts and text summaries. What I like to do is put it on in the background when I'm doing semi-menial work and then focus on it when something catches my attention. Of course talk video has it's shortcomings but Andrew is doing the best startup interviews anywhere.

Aaron is really out of his range of expertise with this one. Did he just read a book on Adwords or something? Almost as bad as his attempt to re-explain Keynesian economics to the world. Among other things, his comments about Google not trying improve CTR are just flat out wrong. Everyone should realize an advanced beginner level of knowledge does not enable you to make profound insights into any complex subject.