I remember seeing articles about people trying to live for a week without leaving the house but instead using "the internet" for all shopping and communications.
Thinking back to that time there seem to be so many parallels with how the internet was perceived then to how bitcoin is perceived now.
This is stupid and it proves nothing. It's the equivalent of living on Rupees for a week. Sure, you might find some Indian people who will take your money, but nobody's trying to replace the USD with either the Rupee or the Bitcoin. Pure sitespam, this.
This is like trying the first Android beta there ever was and then saying that there aren't a lot of apps for it yet.<p>Nearly all current users could have told him that living on Bitcoin for a week is hard to do right now because there is simply no support. This is why we are <i>early adopters</i>, we use something before it's mainstream. You can't actually walk up to anyone and expect to be able to pay them in any currency you can think of.
Is there any concern with keeping the price of an individual bitcoin down so that they can be used more like a proper currency? Meaning, at around $140 per coin currently that's not exactly an ideal 'base' value of a currency.<p>Is there an equivalent to a stock split that could be applied?<p>Just seems like Bitcoin can never really fulfill its dream of being a true global currency if the lowest value of an individual 'coin' is so expensive.
"after a failed attempt to do so via Mt. Gox, the value-setting Bitcoin exchange based in Japan; my bank refused to send funds to Mt. Gox’s account saying it was suspended"<p>Funny how this journalist is the only one having gotten that. Seeing as MtGox is the biggest exchange, that would've been quite the news otherwise, but it isn't, because it's so far working for everybody.
Given the price of BTC, can we start talking about bitcoins in a more readable unit? Like...
an iPhone costs 300cBTC? centibitcoins? or 30dBTC 30 decibitcoins?