[tabsa]

I'm sorry for the rant above, those type of comments get me quite emotional.

I would like to point out some things why Bitcoin and especially Gavin Andresen is so interesting:

1. Gavin is a real forward thinking entrepreneur/hacker who is actually not just trying to make headlines to get venture funded, but is actually quietly building infrastructure for his own startup.

2. If his startup fails, we still get the infrastructure (Bitcoin), public gets enormous value even when/if his startup is dead. Thats quite alot of differrence from startups like cuil or colour, where they burn money (value) and almost nothing is left after the failure, except for cautionary tale how not to do things.

3. Bitcoin (if successfull) brings alot competition to financial sector, and if it gains any significant traction it could change the monopolistic practices of currencies issued by nation states.

[JoachimSchipper]

I'm well aware of why Bitcoin's fans think it's cool. I still don't want to see a Bitcoin article on HN every three days.

Seriously, look at http://searchyc.com/submissions/bitcoin?sort=by_date. There's a couple of people who will upvote everything with Bitcoin in the title, so every last one of these submissions has made it to the front page.

[spenvo]

Sorry that a single Bitcoin link each three days exhausts you. It's been two weeks since my last blog post or submission here. You know why? Because it takes two weeks to put together anything worth reading.

The fact that Gavin was asked (and answered) many of the questions HN-ers have had about escrow and wallet security shows your bias. If having the word "Bitcoin" in the title offends you somehow, please take the time to read what you're bashing so that you can critique it here.

[tabsa]

The article is more about the entrepreneur and less about bitcoin.

Also you could make the same argument about Twitter/Apple/Facebook/Google/Android/Node.js before that there was RoR. Are those news(or even PR releases) more valuable than news about Bitcoin?