you can't build opendime yourself at home, you have to go to that middleman and pay them to buy one so you would be depending on a company to use bitcoin instead of not needing anything but a computer which you already have and an open source software (desktop wallets) which you can download for free.

it depends on what they are holding and not selling.
if it is something that they have actually analyzed and came to the conclusion that it has a true long term potential of growth so they made an "investment" then it is more than fine to keep holding it and not selling and you are correct, that is not greed, that is planning. like bitcoin.

but if it is some altcoin they are bag holding without any analysis and just based on what the social media pumpers told them about some fake potential and just because they hope the price goes up, then it is obviously greed and stupidity combined. this won't end well for them ever.

one of the main points of bitcoin creation was to cut the middlemen and transfer all the power that the middleman had back to the user themselves. using things like OpenDime that you suggest is going to give  that power back to a middleman again which is not what we want even if it were 100% safe to use which it is not.

some idiot who is looking to make money by selling random useless data he finds on the blockchain after adding some imaginary stuff on top of it saying X amount of Y moved to exchange Z.
if i am not mistaken it started during the time when drama about MtGox selling bitcoin and being the reason why price dropped from $20k was the heated but stupid argument on the internet. and people wanted to know when these "whales" move their coins to sell so they could panic sell before them

it is best if you provide links to all your project's dependencies so that it becomes easier to find those projects without needing to do a search for each of them. it also is going to address the licensing issue since not all of them are simple MIT licenses and you have to include a copy of a license like Apache in your project when you are using a dependency that has that license (like serilog).

how do you know it "went out with one signature"? did you actually check your scriptsig field in your transaction and saw only 1 signature there or are you just assuming that because you clicked send and it sent the transaction? if is is the later (which would be my guess) it is because your wallet already contained at least 2 private keys and signed the transaction using them!

that is not tx volume, bitcoin transaction volume should be measured on number of transactions not their value in USD specially when you are comparing it over the long term where price has increased dramatically which is the case here. not to mention that we are talking about bitcoin not USD so reporting things in dollar terms is silly on its own to begin with.

yes, you are missing the fact that a random tweet from a random dude i not a reliable source of information. and OP shouldn't have even linked it here

it happens because the blockchain.com's developer team is the laziest in the cryptocurrency world! their block explorer has been one of the popular ones that existed for nearly as long as bitcoin existed but certain bugs have always been in their platform, they know about it and they have never bothered fixing them!

this is one of them that has caused confusion for many. it simply is an output script (OP_Return and an old multi sig script) that blockchain.com's developers have been lazy to write a simple line of code for it to indicate its type instead of a red error message!

the biggest problem with your referees such as whale alert is that they rely on something very unreliable called chain analysis so you can't really use their data for anything because the rate of mistakes is so high that the report is completely unreliable.

in this case you can not rely on whether these coins are moved to  where it is said they moved to.
that is why whale-alret.io is damaging to the market since IF the market were to actually follow their false reports THAT can cause drops or rises. not to mention that IF they were big they could manipulate the market by falsifying reports.

FWIW, Binance hack was nowhere near biggest hack in history when the record belongs to a Japanese exchange called Coincheck that lost $500+ million in 2018 and MtGox that lost 850,000BTC. the Binance's 7000BTC is dwarfed compared to them. basically anything below 100kBTC is a small hack. haha

i agree that bad news on its own is not going to do anything to the market but it always is accompanied by manipulation and every trader taking advantage of the situation to ride the ups and downs and make money. and of course timing is important too. during a bull run the "bad news" that can reverse it should be huge while during a bear market a small bad news can cause havoc.

with that said i still stand on what i said before. your examples of recent bad news are not bad news at all.
the Bitfinex thing: "recently" is an understatement. we already knew that but we still have no proof and unless government closes down bitfinex, it is not considered bad news.
as for Binance: it was not even related to bitcoin! they are an altcoin exchange not a bitcoin exchange so you really can't expect their hack to affect bitcoin price in first place. if a bitcoin exchange like Coinbase, Bitfinex, Bitstamp, Kraken,... get hacked you can expect a 40% drop not an altcoin exchange just as when Bitfinex got hacked in 2016 we had a big crash.

and finally i am not denying corrections. they are natural part of any trend. my argument is about the size. as it grows it reaches a point where we can no longer call that drop size a "correction" it is a big ass crash. and big ass crashes are not part of a trend specially when we are in an uptrend. so unlike a correction they do need a reason.

well here is another thing to think about for those who from time to time quote one of these big transactions during every drop:
you can never sell large amounts on an exchange or even if you by some miracle sold it, you will never be able to withdraw. because not only the exchange won't allow it but also your banks, their banks and possibly other agencies red flag your ass.
in this case 25k bitcoin is worth more than $200 million... i don't think i have to explain how stupid that sounds

large transactions like this one are happening almost every day and that is not even the biggest. the biggest ones in the past week has been 157,457BTC or $1.4 billion and 144,076BTC or $1.2 billion!!! if you think each time someone moves large amounts price should drop then price should drop literary every week and never rise. besides why does your mind directly go towards someone selling? why don't you assume that someone bought that much because of the drop?!!

here click this link and see the gigantic transactions for the past week yourself: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transactions?q=block_id(578125..)&s=output_total_usd(desc)#
you can also change the date or block ID at the bottom to change the time frame.

i don't think there is any drama left to be had. the main drama was when the decision was being made whether to just bump the block size up or add SegWit or both.
the future improvements you mentioned here, as far as i can tell, are going to be implemented as a new SegWit version. we are currently at version zero so Schnorr for instance can be version 1. and i suppose it would be a much smoother soft fork than what we had in 2017.
of course we can not really predict these things!

remember that you can not "publish" or broadcast such a transaction to the network now because nodes will not keep these transactions in their mempool since based on your mentioned block heights you are choosing a block that is 6,383 far and it will take about 44 days to get there.
the only thing you can do is to sign and store the transaction locally and only broadcast it when the time comes and the transaction (based on the locktimes) becomes valid/mineable.

movement of those coins will cause a ton of drama and drama causes panic and that causes a drop. and since from the time those coins move until the time they reach exchanges and confirm (usually 6+) it takes enough time to affect the market. and that is if we assume the exchange is not going to block that account that tried selling those coins for further investigation.

FWIW the only thing file extensions do is that they tell your operating system which installed application to use to open these files when you double click them. since you don't really want to do that, you can skip setting an extension for the wallet files and that is why you can do things like renaming a text file to have a .mp4 extension and still open it with a text editor and see the same thing.

all of them can also be exported from the Wallet menu (of course it is easier to just use the same file but the option is there)

you can't really post a transaction paying 141 satoshi/byte and call that cheap fee just because the amount being transferred (in this case 66k+BTC) was huge. that fee per byte is the only field that matters in that transaction and it is a gigantic fee to pay for a bitcoin transaction and it should not be that way. you have to keep in mind that bitcoin at protocol level does NOT care about how much money you are transferring, it only cares about the size of the transaction in byte which is why this was a terrible example to post here in my opinion.

it is also a matter of cost versus reward. if someone in the future attempts this and succeeds then they would be breaking the security of the coin they receive and they become worthless because people either won't pay for it anymore or the network will prevent spending those outputs.

this actually proves my point about such big drops needing a big reason to occur but only if you don't just look at the chart but also check the news. for instance the last 2017 drop which was from "September" 1 to 14 occurred because of the large scale news about China banning bitcoin whereas in reality they banned ICOs and market panicked like this thinking it is the end of the world. if you search the internet you can even find articles like from Forbes basically saying bitcoin can't go up at all without China!

the June 2017 crash was because Chinese exchanges which were closed down for months finally announced they are going to allow withdrawals and market panicked thinking there is a big dump coming so they started cashing out.

March 2017 crash was because price tried breaking the ATH of that time  multiple times and failed and basically people thought $1200 is the highest price bitcoin can ever reach

... and so on.

you see none of these are "correction", all of these are market-wide panics caused by some big underlying reason causing such crashes. right now we don't have any reason for such a big crash as OP is suggesting which is why i say it is impossible and if an actual "correction" were to happen it would be to $7500 worst case scenario and without major manipulation.