Bitcoin has a lot of problems.
   Andy, the problem isn't the denomination, the problem is that Satioshi
   has 5% of all the currency, and the Winklevoss twins have another 0.5%.
   If bitcoin becomes worth 100 trillion dollars, they've got a solid 500
   billion for being nobody and doing nothing. That's a problem to me.
   Another problem with bitcoin is that the blockchain won't scale.
   Another problem is that nobody knows how to price transaction fees. And
   then there's the selfish mining problem.
   I think though that we'll see other cryptocurrencies that solve these
   problems. Bitcoin is overinflated, and while the current alt coins
   aren't offering much in the way of competition.
   I'm working on one right now. It's not built but the idea is to use
   proof-of-contribution instead of proof-of-work, where contribution is
   disk storage contributed to a distributed network. The disk storage is
   used to house the blockchain, but it can also be sold on a market for
   people to use. Theoretically, this gives people a way to price the
   currency (using the value of cloud storage vs. the price of storage on
   the network using the network currency).
   The tricky part is preventing cheating, but I think I have a decent
   solution.
   I don't however know a good way to distribute currency to the network,
   for the problems I was explaining to Jim Bell. Storage is currently
   getting cheaper at an exponential rate, and I have no idea how to
   predict the volume of users over time, nor a good way to measure the
   volume of users as immune to sybil attacks. How do you prevent the
   early adopters from becoming stupid wealthy if the currency takes off?