Nah. The parts of the coins that remain will just become more valuable. So even if the world is left with a few million wallets with less than a single usable BTC in each, it will be fine. Satoshi could have picked 21 million or 12 million or 1.2 million. It would still be the same.

Oh, That means I've been hitting refresh on this site almost daily for 20 years.... oh gosh...

I still remember the Slashdot party at 1998 or 1999 LinuxWorld or something in San Jose right after the Redhat IPO and right around the Andover thing. I still have the blue plastic cups!

Modern media must need to sensationalize everything. Just because something is on the Internet doesn't make it "virtual". Did I make a "virtual" purchase on Amazon? Or send a "virtual" message to my boss via email? I think they mean "currency like Bitcoin."

Intel's 14nm process is in most ways better than Samsung's 10nm (Qualcomm's fab for this chip). IMHO this isn't really going to be won on feature size of the process between the two.

The advantages Cavium and Qualcomm have are cheaper chips (also more integrated, SAS, PCI lanes) with higher core counts and more memory channels than Intel. In some applications the higher memory channels count and bandwith will be very valuable (HPC). Intel will be able to discount the heck out of their high core count Xeons to match on price and they can lower the clock to match on IPS for each core. They can't add a memory channel where it doesn't exist.

While I agree that the vertical integration of Intel's past may not be the best way for the future, they still have the best process engineers in the world. They still have the best process for the foreseeable future. They also have some of the best semiconductor engineers out there. So while there is a fight coming. Intel is hardly "fucked" or headed for decimation.

I did the same thing with a home alarm service company. I arranged for an install at the address of my local police department. They didn't call me back.