@vladimir, my argument isn't about fairness. but as i said at the start, i knew it would be misconstrued and wouldn't be warmly received.

i don't really disagree with mike. but as an aside and as an attempt to counteract the bubble mentality, it is interesting (particularly for speculators) to note that a word from gavin here that he is considering my proposal would probably influence the bitcoin/dollar exchange rate far more than most words from bernanke would shake the dollar/euro exchange rate. that would be less true without mass propagation of the hope of retiring on 2100 bitcoins and the speculation that arises from it.

there will be other block chains; none of us can stop it. my idea was that the core dev team could use knowledge of that fact strategically to aid their public relations. mike is perhaps right that it would be counterproductive for them to do so. my fear, however, is that the bitcoin technology will be co-opted by the same centralised banking forces that it could have readily helped to limit, and it would be sad if it did that in part because you and i decided to bank on retiring on a few thousand bitcoins in the current block chain, rather than some other speculative asset.

ideally, bitcoin can lead to a more open banking system that is more consistent with populism and direct democracy than closed, private oligarchy. that is its promise, and it's grandiose enough. we're also, probably temporarily, at a good moment in history for that. the more extremist stuff from fringe groups is counterproductive to that goal, and it was never even slightly realistic. bitcoin will not topple governments or taxing authorities, and of course most people don't think it should.

gavin's pragmatism is terrific, and i agree wholeheartedly with it. i'm just suggesting that his pragmatic reasoning be open, in concept, to favoring the technology over speculators (rather that merchants and entrepreneurs) hoping to get rich using it. it's unlikely we'll be able to retire on 2100 bitcoins anyway, so what i'm proposing isn't even that radical.