How do you think this would sound to the CNBC TV quacks?

"There will only ever be 2.1 quadrillion satoshis in the world."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_large_numbers#Usage_of_names_of_large_numbers

Also, I can imagine the CNBC money-honeys not understanding "bits" and going on air to say:
"BREAKING NEWS: XBT has now been approved for bitcoin and 21 trillion is the new limit!"

Hopefully, there will be one in every country. The most decentralized approach to forming a powerful educational and advocacy group is to allow associations to grow from the bottom-up where they are able to structure their own boards and by-laws. Networking together is then a force multiplier.

The Bitcoin Foundation seeks autonomous affiliates in every country so that we can rely on the local/regional partners for their local expertise and connections. Also, we can provide infrastructure support to their organization that dramatically lowers their startup time and costs, thereby making the overall mission more effective.

I believe the thread was originally posted in the open on the membership forums.

While I genuinely appreciate community feedback, I dislike the misleading title of this thread. It's one individual's opinion and it may not even be actionable.

Committee chairs, just as board directors, are free to have their own opinions on issues. It doesn't automatically imply that it is the policy of the entire Foundation or even that the Foundation has in a mandate in that particular area. Just as forum members here disagree and debate, the members of the Foundation have similar disagreements and debates on a consistent basis. In the end, we represent the makeup of our membership and you can see from the latest election results that it is a wide variety of opinion.

The committee chairs, just as board directors, are free to have their own opinions on issues. It doesn't automatically imply that it is the policy of the Foundation. Just as forum members here disagree and debate, the members of the Foundation have similar disagreements and debates.

Also, it is not detrimental for the Bitcoin Foundation to have an office in the US and it does not have to be the only office worldwide. Remember, the Tor Project is a US-based nonprofit as well, because jurisdiction for a nonprofit is not very material.

Thanks to LetsTalkBitcoin for hosting the debate on very short notice and thanks to Andreas for moderating.
I appreciate all of the candidates making time over Saturday to participate.

Thanks to LetsTalkBitcoin for hosting the debate on very short notice and I am pleased to have had the Bitcoin Foundation sponsor it.
Thanks also to the five candidates that made the time over Saturday to participate.

Congratulations to Jesse and team! I participated in the beta and I have been following Kraken's progress over the months with great interest. It would be great if Kraken used the XBT designation for bitcoin.

Bitcoin Foundation participants should be applauded for their work in providing free educational sessions for Washington DC bureaucrats. We had highly-capable people in attendance and there is not a lot of glory in that work. It is hardly regulatory favoritism to do the following:

i. Explain the transparency of the block chain;
ii. Emphasize how user-defined privacy and irreversibility is a default within bitcoin;
iii. Demonstrate the resiliency of the decentralized and global Bitcoin network;
iv. Explain how market-based legitimacy is currently winning over legislation-based legitimacy, which is why trading volume is not centered in the US.

For my part, I elected to focus on the developments and good work being done in Germany and other countries while continuing to expand the inclusiveness of the Bitcoin Foundation to other parts of the world. Bitcoin is not US-centric and, with a global footprint, neither is the Bitcoin Foundation.

Writer - CoinDesk

We're looking for writers and contributors to join the CoinDesk
global editorial team.

You'll have experience in technology and possibly finance, and be
incredibly passionate about great content.

You'll enjoy finding stories and interviewing the influencers
behind them. Relentless, driven and ambitious, you'll pay
attention to the details and love breaking a story.

It's great if you are already conversant in bitcoin and digital
currency. Either way, the quality of your writing is the most
important thing.

Please contact writers@coindesk.com with more information about
yourself (and examples of your writing) and we will get back to
you if we think there could be a good fit.

The CoinDesk team
--
Jeremy Bonney | Product Manager | Nomodo | +44 7734 862981

Excellent project, Charles.
I am very supportive of this!
Let me know how I can assist more.

Consider it done. I fully support bitcoin fungibility across the board without exception.

The miners and mining pools are the actual "Federal Reserve" because that's the heart of de-centralized banking. You assign more power to the Foundation than is warranted.

When the State enforcement and regulatory pressure comes, it will be swift, decisive and unforgiving. The Foundation will be there defending the individuals and businesses targeted and exploiting the last vestiges of any remaining 'gray areas' to keep people out of jail in a pro bono capacity.

Account has been back for over a week. Also, proud to be utilizing two-factor auth for tweets (new Twitter service).
I'm interested in how people view current bitcoin dev priorities around privacy.

For instance, see:
"Mixing without a trusted intermediary is already supported by bitcoin" (via J. Garzik) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=139581.0
(this seems like it would prevent simple analysis, but not smart analysis)

Zerocoin has too much overhead (could be optimized); "lower hanging privacy fruit, at the moment, would be getting rid of address re-use and de/refragmenting coins" (via M. Hearn) https://plus.google.com/u/0/100109831949151899859/posts/Kq6JAxBXS8d

I liked the discussion with Pete because he is a trader as well.

However, the lending/borrowing function does not really need to change that much. Lenders will price based on perceived risk and level of collateral. Both parties will hedge exchange rate risk via derivatives markets. Happens all around the multi-currency world today.

Also, arbitration and a free market for law has been prototyped at http://www.judge.me/about

By Paul Rosenberg

"Bitcoin has now put governments and banks in the position of judging themselves. They will write their own verdicts."

http://lewrockwell.com/rosenberg/rosenberg-p17.1.html

LMAO. On-line gaming tokens. Full retard police state.

Which government agency has responsibility for regulating options and calendar spreads on air guitars?
Is it the cool long-haired regulator?

Gavin's answer to #2 is why bitcoin doesn't conveniently fit into Mises' Regression Theorem, which doesn't account for digital mediums, let alone vulnerable ones. I wish more Austrians realized that too.