No; for that to be the case, equivalence would have to be proven (i.e. construct a proof of Shanuel that works when you assume this theory to be true.)
Right now, it could be that there exists a proof that is valid and does not depend on Shanuel's conjecture.
The given answer is "no"[1], all powers are irrational. I'm not sure how this simple "no" would be helpful to you without understanding any part of the proof.
If the large pools make a deal, any transactions they don't pick up will only ever get accepted after a very long wait. Hell, since they control >50% of the network, they can simply make the new transaction fees a new rule and force lower transactions to not be accepted by anyone (i.e. ignoring those blocks, like a 51% attack.)
Policy by economic (mining) majority could be an issue in the future when the policy directly determines the profits of that majority.
You can only mine (for a significant share) with very significant investments, and transaction fees competely go to miners, so it's in their interest to raise them (albeit slowly, to not curb the adoption of bitcoin too much.)
The mining pools (groups of miners who've joined forces) control it in practice. This effectively gives a very small number of people control over significant things, like transaction fees.
The answer to things like the Pidgin configuration issue you mentioned could be https://tails.boum.org/ -- a live USB distribution that runs all traffic through Tor, and comes with Pidgin preinstalled and preconfigured. It has optional encrypted persistence too.
Given the PRISM revelations (and the today-reported fact that the AIVD has reportedly been recording and analyzing all domestic calls since 2000) try moving to drop all cases since 2000.
If I remember correctly, it's not some arbitrary choice of the lawyers, but it can be required by law (under some interpretations?)
You should check with the lawyers if tampering with font size or spacing does not go against the reasons for using caps in the first place.
Edit: The reason this is done is the "Conspicuous" part at http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/1-201.html -- note in particular " Language in the body of a form is "conspicuous" if it is in larger or other contrasting type or color" -- your solution makes the capslock text _smaller_ than the normal text, which would possibly invalidate it. But, of course, IANAL, which is also why I don't tamper with my lawyers' texts without checking with them.
Part of this is somewhat similar to how Windows 8 measures "Start-up impact" of applications that auto-start, and allows you to disable them with two clicks. (In task manager)
A while ago I considered getting a similar setup for traveling, but I am now very happy I did not: I've spent quite some time traveling lately, and finding good reliable wifi has been a constant battle. (Southern and East Europe)
If I had to be connected to get work done, I'm afraid I wouldn't have been able to get very much done.
I like the concept. Perhaps you could have multiple "selection rows" under eachother -- e.g. on top scroll hats, middle you scroll shirts, below that pants, below that shoes. You can switch between the rows to choose which one you want to be scrolling, but the rest of the outfit stays visible.