It's not bad, I just don't want to make a commitment and then have to break it due to unforeseen difficulties. As to "why" those details were told to certain individuals at the conference, it was simply because they asked. I don't even know who the various individuals were that I explained our plan to. If the community did not react so violently to changes in statements made here, we would be more open about our plans, but as it is, if we make a statement and then later have to change that, it turns into a giant mess.
Nedbert9: We have the best interests of Bitcoin as a whole at heart. Since you disagree that keeping the security of the network is of paramount importance, please let me know what your order number(s) are and I will get your refund issued immediately so that you may pre-order elsewhere.
Here's a thought: Just use a mining client which allows you to filter the difficulty of blocks as you generate them. Just artificially mine at a higher difficulty (e.g. 100 fold) than the main network. That means that you throw blocks away which meet the network target, but not your own target.
Simple yet efficient. Also works on the test net.
That would be a comprise solution. You forfeit some of the profits, but you get to mine on the main network...