When dealing with the bullshit vendor class of merchants, the questions that don't get answered are usually the important ones. Building 7 is an obvious example, seemingly not existing in the wild and inaccurate saga of 9/11 as it is known in the mainstream.
Exposition in a short article describes bitcoin thus:
Bitcoin is a form of fully-digital currency that is widely used is some (often seedy) corners of the Internet. “Bitcoin mining” refers to the algorithmic process by which Bitcoins are earned. A computer or group of computers attempts to solve an extremely complex equation, and once the answer has been reached, a block of Bitcoins are awarded. The equations get more and more difficult as the years go on to compensate for increased computing power.
It can take years to solve just one of these equations on a single PC, so as a result some people network their PCs in a coordinated effort.
Desperate and short-lived schemes are apparently the staple of collapsing economies. Bitcoin seems to fall into this category, purporting to solve the problem of currency issue, but introducing significant problems of its own. I conclude its moment of prime profit must be short-lived because I strongly suspect that gaping flaws work much better for currencies people were born with, than one that's sold to them in the age in which many persons carry an evolved resistance to infomercials.
It so happens that it is also the age in which giant banks (beneficiaries of the current gaping flaws in currency issue) extract further advantage by using massively powerful server farms and low latency network connections to automate sheep shearing of the stock market, AKA High-Frequncy Trading.
A question you won't find answered relating to bitcoins, is how those who already acquired the most resources would be prevented from extracting unfair advantage via the new system. Bitcon is designed around the premise that more processing power equals more money. Even if the generation of bitcoins could be limited per account, the creation of fake accounts (in effect fake persons) could not be limited without a key component.
The solution to this basic design flaw that we're no doubt meant to come up with—but not until enough people have a stake in the success of the bitcon—is that a hard accounting should be made of all activity by some appointed authority. Being the first true digital, and global, currency, that would require a detailed (and mandatory) centralised global ID system, tied directly to your financial activity.
It is particularly noteworthy that further centralisation is usually the solution offered by the bullshit vendor class of merchant, having extracted all the profit from the problem that it could. Centralisation serves to concentrate control, and means therefore power. It is further noteworthy that control and power (or "order" as it is amorously referred to) is usually sought by those so unable to cope with the realities of existence that they go to extremes to make the universe appear to accord with their limited understandings.