Quote from: cartman on June 14, 2011, 12:22:03 PM

just to add some of my thoughts:

1. bitcoin is supposed to be a currency, one would not have bigger amounts of cash, neither at home NOR in a bank. one would invest it in something real.
2. I admit its charming to hold bitcoins to gamble. Nevertheless I claim it to be an efficient market. If it was very likely bitcoin will be worth 1000$, it alreay would be near there

Tautology. People started in bitcoin with barter concept. Then GPUs came. Now people want to trade for services and prtoduc. It will be $100 when the ones with the balls want to take the time.

Quote

3. nevertheless, I though about the following: separate in savings account and payment account and keep the savings account offline (encrypt->usb->delete unencrypted). when putting the savings-wallet.dat online, use a live system which is guaranteed not to be compromised.

Someone already lost 65 coins via backup malfunction. One wallet, two accounts. Add receive, send, activate permission semantics.

Quote

4. there WILL be banks or some other payment providers, because there will be demand for it due to low-tech users
5. such a provider would need to be liable (real name, within some proper jurisdiction) and have features as the author of the thread suggested.

Liabilities this early. Not gonna happen. Paypal policy has already caused people to distrust buyers more than sellers.

Quote

6. furthermore i think it is neccesary, bitcoins can be insured (which such an provider could do with the fees he gets), because if not, trust in bitcoin might vanish. this is somehow similar to credit cards, where you are insured in case of theft. nobody would (hopefully) use it, if this were not the case.
7. in the end, this is a bad day for bitcoin, because there only will be a small percentage of users, able to 100% secure their money, so this for sure is not the last case of theft and the bitcoin image is going to suffer...

The image is not an issue. It's getting a cult following.