If they are having a problem and can't pay out they should really take the site down.

A total waste of time...I have received no payout at all also and have gotten no response to several personal messages to the "Bitspill" chap who used to post on here.

For what it's worth...I got a response within about ten minutes. I fully admit that it is almost certainly a "form response" about Bitcoin and nearly everyone will get the same one.(Although the grammar of the first two lines doesn't seem as polished as the rest and may not be "form").

The point is...someone at least paid attention to it...read enough of it to recognize what I was writing about...responded...and no doubt put a check mark somewhere in the tally of topics that concern customers.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts regarding the Bitcoins.

I would like to let you know that we currently don't accept bitcoins as your payment method for your order, I believe that this is a disappointing news.

However it's a good thing that you've brought this up to our attention and we'll consider your feedback as we plan further improvements.

Strong customer feedback like yours is very important in helping us continue to improve our website and services. I will pass your message on to the appropriate department in our company. We always want to know how our customers react to all aspects of shopping on our website.

One of our aims at Amazon.com is to provide a convenient and efficient service.

We look forward to seeing you again soon.

Best regards,
Lara T.

So why don't you all stop posting your laments here...and do what I just did..log into your account at Amazon...go to "contact us" and tell them what you think?

I really am not saying that in a snarky way...I'm just saying that it doesn't hurt to let them know directly what you as a customer think.

Well...just as a word to the wise...the Bitcoin address at the bottom of your posts would probably be a good place for the Feds to start to followup on you through the blockchain if they chose to...and unless you have been religiously using a Tor browser for all of your posts here as "Superdork"...you've probably left a pretty big signature of IP addresses as a second strike.

As the other poster responded to you...personally I don't see the value in risking jail time for tax evasion. Your milage may vary.

At the moment the vast majority of BTC transactions are associated with speculative investment (people are "adopting" based on the expectation of "future" demand).

There is no other significant external increase in "demand"...and won't be until there is significantly increased adoption and demand for Bitcoins to handle the increased transaction intensity.

To some extent the current price of a Bitcoin already has factored in some level of increased future adoption and demand...at least in my own mind. The current market cap of Bitocin far exceeds what is needed for the current level of transactions.

Agreed...and that likely will happen over time. It is a disruptive technology and it's not surprising that existing rules and regulations don't easily fit to it.

There is nothing to say that one segment of the government might choose to treat it like as asset...and another segment of the government choosing to treat it as money I suppose? I mean let's me honest there are lots of inconsistencies throughout enforcement of federal regulations.

Perhaps I have not thought through all of the ramifications of this (or are even informed enough to know what those are)...but I'm not sure what immediate impact this "should" have on Bitcoin value (understanding that it isn't a very deep market and subject to psychological whims).

Obviously this makes it more difficult for Chinese citizens to buy more Bitcoin...but that shouldn't be devastating. Given the tight monetary fist that the Chinese government has over the economy there...I don't see any Chinese that already own Bitcoin rushing to sell them off given how facile they make for getting money out of the country (and thus the reasons I would imagine for the government clamping down if this story is true)?

Except as I added in my edit above...I wonder what the legal boys and girls think about that at Johns Hopkins. Matt Green was and I believe still is a faculty member at Johns Hopkins...and the others involved in the project were students of his?

Seems to me their may be some concerns about the name of Johns Hopkins popping up in the almost certain articles about the use of Zerocoin for trade of drugs, guns, etc. on the black market?

I'm sorry...but in my own opinion (which likely is not shared by you...and most likely some others on this board)...the notion that Bitcoin was EVER going to completely replace fiat currency is and was an ideal NEVER likely to be realized.

I agree with that to a point...however, it is worth using it to make a micropayment of say 2 cents to instantly read some content on the internet (something not currently possible with existing payment systems because of unreasonable high minimum fees).

Which means tracking capital gains or losses "could" be a stumbling point for this "best use" of the technology. But I still believe that a bit of code can solve this problem to provide the necessary tracking and documentation.

I'm not sure how much "Grandma" sends....but there are 100's of billions of USD sent by others each year (v.s. the current 7 billion dollar Bitcoin market cap).

http://www.consumersinternational.org/our-work/financial-services/key-projects/global-money-transfers/

And the fees amount currently to 10-20%.

This is only one of those "best uses".

Which I suspect will lead to less "short term" speculation in Bitcoin...which is perhaps likely to tend towards being better for Bitcoin in the "long term"?

Except if a particular coin is ruled illegal because it is a security risk...it will NEVER be accepted by your neighborhood coffee shop...Overstock...or ultimately some place like Amazon.

So its "success" will be limited to the world of a "Silk Road 3".

Edit: Furthermore I am no intellectual property rights expert...but I do wonder what if any rights Johns Hopkins University might have on the development of this technology...and therefor say on its release and  further development. I think at the very least they will be thinking about public relations aspects at this point because of their tie to its development.

Yes that is correct.

If that is true...and I am not at all doubting that you are correct...then I suspect that Zerocoin is dead out of the box because governments WILL certainly make illegal dealing in cryptocurrencies which can be easily used to facilitate illegal activities (which means they will never have a chance of mass adoption).

I haven't followed Zerocoin very closely...but in fact I think that I recall that the developers of the protocol tried very hard to have it adopted into the Bitcoin protocol...but that it was rejected for the very reason that it was assumed that this would create significant friction with moving Bitcoin forward into more mainstream adoption (a smart decision I would say).

It was only after that time that Zercoin developers proposed to issue their own coin.

If it is considered a global "currency" than taxation of profits exchanging in and out will be handled like exchanges in and out of any other "currency" (which as an aside is actually less favorable).

I don't understand that point? You want it to be a recognized "currency"...but not one subject to all the other properties of other currencies world-wide when exchanged from one to the other?

I am not positive what you are referring to when you say "which we all of a sudden really need"?, but:

"Green has said that intent of Zerocoin is not to facilitate criminal activity, and suggested that a “back door” or other features could be added to the Zerocoin protocol to allow police, as one example, to track money laundering."

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/onepercent/2013/03/bitcoin-zerocoin.html

If you are referring to the recent IRS ruling...my guess is that the government will still consider tax evasion as criminal activity.

There was ALWAYS destined to be tax implications to investing and transacting in Bitcoin if it was a technology that truly had sufficient utility to survive.

Here in my mind is a rather good statement of why the current actions of the IRS is actually a positive advancement for Bitcoin.

http://www.nasdaq.com/article/3-reasons-the-irs-bitcoin-ruling-is-good-for-bitcoin-cm339333

Record keeping is going to add certain complexities...but it seems to be that was almost always destined to be the case regardless of how taxation was ultimately chosen to be handled.

Somehow it doesn't seem to me that the necessary record keeping can't eventually be handled with a bit of code.