But yes, if you think you will convince me that regulation is unnecessary, you are wasting your time. It, even if imperfectly, does ensure a more or less level playing field, a single set of rules, and most importantly accountability when things go awry. Nothing against bitcoin, knock yourselves out. I honestly do believe it will survive, just with different markets.
Nonsense. Regulation is inherent to all human interaction. It is not possible to conduct any transaction at all, ever, without a form of regulation applied on the transaction by one or both parties, with established consequences of failing. The rules of engagement (regulation) specifically describe the common transaction, so to even consider regulation's necessity is irrelevant. Regulation can be established by any group, or person, and others can choose to follow, or not. Government regulation only has meaning because there is a police force to enforce it, but there is no difference to the regulation customers apply when they pressure MtGox to not be so fail. This is the nature of human hive dynamics, or group psychology.
What is at quest here is who knows how to regulate a market better; politicians, self-interested bankers, or self-interested plebs. Bitcoins are giving the power to the plebs to regulate their own wealth. Of course governments won't like that, because money manipulation is how they make people pay for stupid wars, and may have regulations to stop plebs having these crazy ideas of grandeur and self empowerment. I personally believe the plebs are the better ones to back, because they act just as efficiently as bankers or politicians (probably more stably), but don't have the super greed of power bankers, nor the power inebriation of politicians.