Game 1:  26, 18'

The document has over 200 pages, so of course I didn't read all of it, but I looked through the summary, and it all sounds great. Honestly, it's refreshing to see a judge being straightforward in his statements, instead of using legal jargon without any specifics. He's talking about Wright lying repeatedly to the court about many things, with the biggest lie being that Craig is Satoshi. He also clarifies that Craig Wright isn't the author of Bitcoin whitepaper, is not the person who operated online under the name of Satoshi, and did not write early Bitcoin software.
I think most of us here have already known all that, but it's good to have it officially confirmed by an esteemed judge in a country with strong judicial standards.

It's hard to imagine being a developer when you don't know how developers work, and what they can actually achieve, especially with Bitcoin consensus mechanism. I think I'd be interested in tackling the issue of fee spikes by creating something that perhaps doesn't ban Ordinals and other similar things but greatly discourages them. That would uphold the freedom Bitcoin stands for, while also helping to solve the issue. However, I don't know if it's technically doable and how.

The op poses a valid and relevant question. Bitcoin is meant to be used in a decentralized way, but of course people have the freedom to turn to centralized solutions as well. Some use them because of lack of knowledge about noncustodial wallets. Others are interested in Bitcoin as an investment asset, so they don't really care about the ideas behind it. Also, there are those using exchanges or custodial wallets out of convenience, especially if they make a lot of transactions regularly.

Poverty is one of the biggest global issues, and there's no simple solution to it. I can't recommend much without knowing the situation, and situations are very different in different countries. For instance, the op mentioned that online jobs are illegal, but is that restriction ever enforced and is there a risk of criminal responsibility or big fines for that? Also, if it's hard to find jobs, what about being self-employed or starting up a small business to create jobs? On that note, what's the situation with obtaining education (because I know that sometimes it can actually be free or just very affordable in some low-income countries, which can be a good start)? Finally, is there any chance of saving up a bit and relocating to a different country where things might be easier?

I think the more objective approaches suggested in the thread, such as using Google trends and some other resources. To me, it's important to not just watch the global trend but see what's going on in my own country. So when there's local news about someone starting to accept Bitcoin, and especially if it's not a standalone case but is something multiple parties are doing, that's a good indicator to me. I also think that crypto fear & greed index can be useful to get the overall sentiment, but it's not specific to retail trends.

I agree that it's unfortunate when people are misled by someone who is spreading unhelpful if not harmful ideas under the pretence of religion. Of course, whether you're religious or not, you can work hard and try to achieve success. Religion shouldn't be against success if it means that a person is gaining resources to contribute to the community and is just generally working hard for God (an interesting interpretation of that was offered by Max Weber who argued that Protestantism and capitalism went hand-in-hand because of Protestants accept on hard work in secular world as a Christian priority).
Calling Bitcoin demonic is just unhelpful and unreasonable, as the sacred books of major religions were written well before something like Bitcoin could become conceivable.

When someone is charged with a crime, it's important to determine whether it's an unjustified charge that is actually for something a person says/does/represents or a justified charge. Then, if it's the latter, a person has the right to fair trial. In case of Samourai wallet, the founders are accused that their tool "facilitated more than $100 million in money laundering transactions from illegal dark web markets". The charge itself seems fair, and the US has fairly strong democratic institutions, so there's a good chance of fair trial.
CZ pleaded guilty to enabling money laundering, and 4 months of prison aren't a big term, IMO. Roger Ver is charged with $48 million tax fraud, which is also a serious crime.
I agree it's a long of cases with very recent updates, but that might be an attempt to impose strict regulations rather than to go against Bitcoin. Also, note that the charges are against representatives of centralized platforms and only in one case against an individual who didn't pay taxes. Overall, that seems fair to me.

If we're choosing between Bitcoiner and Bitcoinist, I'm definitely on the side of the first option. That's because -er and -or usually signify that it's a person that's doing something: employer, buyer, investor, etc. On the other hand, -ist has a lot of negative connotations that are related to accusations of people wronging others on the basis of certain social identities: racist, sexist, ageist, etc.
I can see that there are different arguments in the thread (like physicist, archaeologist, etc.), though, and it's also a fair point.
As for the study, I agree with those who are suggesting Bitcoinology.

It feels like those struggling with hyperinflation should have very low trust in fiat and thus be encouraged to try Bitcoin as an alternative. Moreover, Bitcoin is actually less volatile than some of those hyperinflationary currencies. But it's interesting that the op points out that it's not happening in Argentina. Perhaps familiarity and status quo play a bigger role than some expect it to play, and people want stability which, of course, they still associate with fiat and certainly not with Bitcoin.
But we'll see the road Argentina will take, and perhaps Bitcoin can become huge there if the right infrastructure for its daily usage becomes available.

It's great that there's a calculator, but it's clearly just for the US market, right? I think the answer to buying vs renting depends strongly on where you live, whether you have access to a reasonable mortgage, and whether you can buy accommodation where you actually want to live/have work/have relatives or friends nearby.
My country has some of the highest mortgage interest rates in the world, and mortgages are generally uncommon, very restrictive, not very accessible. So when people buy, they usually save up enough to pay the whole sum, but that's only possible after working for, I don't know, 10+ years at a very high-paying job and ideally also having a partner in a similar situation with whom you're saving up together.
The rent, on the other hand, is very cheap in my country, and it's easy to find a place to rent (I mention it because I know it can be a huge challenge in some countries because they have a housing crisis). So an obvious and often the only real option is to rent, and then if you're planning to buy, you usually need to save up while renting.
But all that only applies to my country.

I don't consider CBDCs a threat to Bitcoin, and I don't think CBDCs are evil per se, but I'm simply sceptical about this whole idea. The idea of CBDCs has been around for years, and it seemed at some point like it was going to get mainstream. But, actually, only a handful of countries are seriously exploring them and have taken any steps to at least conduct pilot testing of them. So, honestly, I don't think they're kicking it off, and I'm sure Visa/Mastercard have a huge lobby to make sure they aren't left out of the game.
For now, I believe that debit and credit cards will remain relevant and widespread simply because CBDCs won't become a big thing.

Volatility, usage of Bitcoin by criminals, irreversibility of transactions, environmental impact, occasionally high transaction fees etc. can all be considered if they are important to a certain person. But I'd say that this isn't what one should start from. The initial questions should be: how much money can I afford to lose and thus can dedicate to investment? Do I believe that Bitcoin's long-term upward price trend will continue for the years to come? Which wallet should I use, and which seed storage method will I choose? Will I sell when Bitcoin gets above/below a certain point?

So far, Bitcoin is doing well pricewise, but I don't believe there is such a strict correlation between inflation and Bitcoin price, between Fed interest rate and Bitcoin price, or any other similar things. Sometimes Bitcoin behaves similarly to the stock market, and sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes major global disruptions affect it negatively, and sometimes they don't.
Bitcoin is just too unpredictable.

So far, I believe Bitcoin has been doing well after halving. The price isn't at the highest level, but it's pretty close to that. It seems to me that, with long bear markets, Bitcoin price is 50% or more below the ATH most of the time, so we're in that rare time of relatively high prices right now.
We've recently experienced another major spike in transaction fees, but I don't think it's related to halving. And, thankfully, it seems to be over, so we have both high BTC price and low transaction fees lately.

I guess, to me, the optional registration sounds like a good idea, but it depends on who gets access to it. If it goes into public registries, I think it should be for public figures because their finances are a matter of public interest, but regular people shouldn't be encouraged to make themselves vulnerable like that. If it's a registration with authorities (so, confidential), I believe the information should be available to the law enforcement agencies, but maybe not to everyone else in the government. Optional registration is nice, but I don't think it will convince the authorities, though, as they can just point out that criminals simply won't use this feature.

Others in the thread are right to question the alleged hardship the op is talking about. The top countries by crude oil production are the United States, Russia, and Saudi Arabia. The US is doing great, still being the #1 economy in the world. Russia is a special case because of heavy sanctions due to its war against Ukraine, but its economy unfortunately grew by more than 3% despite everything in 2023. Saudi Arabia experienced a minor decline in 2023, it seems, but is expected to grow in 2024.
It's important to diversify economies that depend on natural resources because the world must move away from those resources to fight the effects of climate change. But it seems early to talk of hardships here.

I don't think investing in Bitcoin requires a lot of knowledge, but of course it's important to weigh in the risks and only invest what one can afford to lose. Answering the questions, I'd say a good time to invest in Bitcoin is when the price is 50% or more below the ATH, but it's okay to invest at any point one has an opportunity to do or, or to do DCA. Planning to invest should include choosing a method and platform of purchase, a non-custodial wallet to store BTC, and getting an idea of under which circumstances you will sell. Following up, to me, just means checking the price from time to time and perhaps checking the funds as well. And you're ready when you feel ready, it's a subjective matter.

I used to rely on recommended fees by Electrum (ETA mode), but at some point, the fees got way out of sync with what was reasonable, so I switched to fees based on mempool, and I also just check mempool space every time before making a transaction. I find it a very reliable source, with very practical estimates. The fee is now around $1 or a little bit more for the highest priority. Fees occasionally get crazy, but it has nothing to do with specific blocks (I mean, there's no pattern there). It's just other events like spikes of Ordinals' activities or something like that.

I don't know whether this story is true, but it sounds like a nice case of how Bitcoin can be of meaningful help to families, and how even a 2x increase of the price can make a big difference. I like that it's a practical use case where an investment is made with a specific goal in mind, and there's a clear sell target. It's very common in this community to just hodl indefinitely, without a good understanding of what and when to use that money for. They can argue that at some point you won't need to sell your BTC, and that's the point they're waiting for, but this kind of practical and meaningful investment that the op described makes sense to me, too.