LN devs are themselves saying there are many issues that cannot be fixed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lMLo-7yF5k&t=570
^ just one example

a small amount is fud. but the fud panic sellers are not causing the dips.
 think about it, fud/panic sellers are thousands of simultaneous but independent people... deciding at the exact minute to sell all at the same time.. doesnt happen.
they REACT after the fact,,, they are for emphasis "the after effect". not the cause.

_____
           \
            \
             \
              \/\/\/
what you notice is miners/VC's (whales with excess funds) sell here
what you notice is panicer's(small minnows) sell here

the thing is. when the price dips. it dips significantly.
if it was by random people. you would see separate small dips after the fact. not hoard dips of large amount in one.

but they are reacting to the dip.. not to altcoin drama.
EG did you see a panic drama price dip last august 2017.. no. because no large whale drama of VC/asics happened in august on the exchanges..
so yes fud panic was a SMALL affect. but as a small tail after action of a dip.

but not related due to altcoin drama. direct.
the psychology of panic is.
"the price tanked, i must sell now..." minutes later "ill blame craig/ver for losses to not feel guilty of own loss/stupidity"
its not
"the price tanked, i must research why" minutes later "it must be craig so i must sell"
its not
"craig is making an alt, i must sell" minutes later "OMG it tanked, its craigs fault"

panicers panic due to seeing a price. and then find an excuse, any excuse to not feel guilty for their own losses

what im just doing is informing people that the dip was not craig/ver. they cant afford to waste funds and exchange arbitrage shows no pattern of them moving funds from their [alt/btc] then [btc/usd] to cause it

part if it is true.. but it goes alot deeper
big farms get fiat from investors as OTC contracts that span months. where an investor pre funds the farm and over time the farm hands coins to the investor at set rates/agreed prices.

now the deeper part
when a farm is getting MORE coin than it can offer OTC because its mining more efficiently and the exchange is available to give them profit they will. so where they usually dont touch exchanges. they suddenly are
as you said they usually never sell on exchanges.

which counters your own "continue to sell the same or sell less"..
before this month they hardly ever touched exchanges, but this month they are. meaning they are selling more.. because they never sold much in the first place before

this month is different is different
they have more BTC then usual so can grab more fiat to expand faster than their normal contract plan
also alot of people bought new asics using BTC so as a second income stream the farms have more btc then they need.
again not normal time of year.
this month is a bumper month where certain farm has EXCESS btc above its OTC demands
..
but like i said as a separate event . VC's from 2017 are now unlocking their coins and spending finally. so its not just mining
...
but definetly not sv abc.. ...  sv abc is just separate insignificant side drama of playing up some fame.
(exchange market arbitrage analysis does not show a pattern.. so craig isnt cycling funds)

the funds of sv abc are not hitting btc.
that stats of exchanges do not show that craig is selling down BTC/USD.
(if you understand arbitraging of one market going down another has to go up, to cycle the funds around.. this has not happened)

abc and sv are not the cause

he triggered NOTHING

the hashrate of BTC is due to new asic switch over..
farms are switching 2 s9's for 1 T15 to keep hashrates the same(prevent a hash spike). they are using boost so that they can reduce the amount of asics needed while still making blocks within the healthy block target time. (to prevent a difficulty spike)
farms learned not to spike hashrate/difficulty from the 2013 event. which caused a temporary price spike and then a 2 year limp along of stagnation. so this time they are trying something different.

the price of BTC is due to more efficient mining means more profitable to mine even below previous baseline value and some VC contracts from a year ago that are finally unlocked and able to spend.

people knew new asics were going to happen, it started last month and people knew back in summer that last months next gen rigs were happening
the VC contracts were from november 2017 so had alot of time.

the only thing is craig knew it too so timed his separate insignificant stuff.. to now try taking glory for btc stuff even though he aint the cause.

craig just bought up some second hand asics that are old gen(obsolete). he is not stealing hashpower. he is just creating his own hashrate. not stealing btc hashrate

the abc sv drama is fake drama.. it has no influence on btc events

it was just well timed drama of sv abc who are just taking the oppertunity to play off whats really happening within btc. to pretend they are the cause. they are just glory hounding a separate event with their drama to fake being influencers.

again sv-abc has nothing to do with whats actually happening within btc.
sv-abc is as important as any other altcoin (meaning no importance/significance)

dont be fooled by the social drama of fame grabbing. instead look at whats really happening within btc.
if you concentrate on btc and ignore the sv-abc side drama. you will gain a different prospective

as for LN, your right. even the devs agree
https://youtu.be/8lMLo-7yF5k?t=570

these price events have nothing to do with the altcoin drama

those studying actual stats and information knew that november would be a weird month.(no one knew how weird but they knew october-december would be different than the last 8month stagnation)
the altcoin drama is just the distraction of social drama of craig trying to to fake being an influencer by saying he and ver are the cause.

iin short. if you knew a car crash was going to happen or a lottery win of a neighbour(positive or negative drama). in 3 months. you would spend 3 months planning a plan where you organise stuff so that when it happened everyone looked at you as the significant face of fame, and you would try to take some glory from it.

yep we seen it at things like 9-11. after it happened people ran TOWARD the twin towers to take selfies and proclaim they were involved(victims) hoping to get media to 'fame' them up as victims.

you see it all the time. "OMG i could have been hurt because i visited new york at some point."(facepalm) everyone wanted sympathy that it could have been them. everyone wanted some attention even when they were not involved.

imagine what people do for fame if they had pre knowledge of events thy had nothing to do with

no conspiracy

the 2013 spike explained.
in 2013 ASICS were released. this made it more expensive to mine. as such some hobbiests stopped gpu mining and instead found it cheaper to just buy bitcoin instead of mine.
those with asics seen the price rise. and more hashpower went on the network, at the same time people noticed the price going up and seen that a up-cycle of the price/hashrate(which would increase the price further) so a FOMO event occured. this cause what should ave been a movement upto $250 turn into a $1200 speculation FOMO price rise.
then events like mtgox killed off the speculation and the correction down started brought prices down closer back to the cost of mining cycle

the 2017 spike explained.
in november 2017 VC's needed to buy BTC to pay out btc to certain private contracts. this should have only caused a temporary rise to about $10k to cover the contracts(which would have correcting down to a few thousand). but again FOMO speculation made it go to $20k. again unsustainable temporary and so it corrected down. this time the corrections was not sparked by an event, but purely because the $20k went too far up. that naturally it had to fall
asic miners added more asics during the 2017 period bringing the costs and mining cycle of value up to near the $6k area.. which is why the correction of $20k settled to the $5800 area and prices remained above the $5800 for the year (from november 2017-2018)

these VC contracts, some of which had a 12 month lock, thus ending november 2018 at which time the holders were able to spend finally.

the novmber 2018 price movement
as said partially due to VC contracts finally unlocked. but also last month. ASIC manufacturers started testing next gen asics. but this time they didnt want to push up the hashrate as they learned from shooting themselves in the foot in 2013 that a short term adrenalin profit rush ended with a 2 year limp(2014-2016 stagnant pricing). this time they are swapping 2-3 old asics for 1next gen asic. thus keeping the hashrate from rising, but still keeping the hashrate within range to continue making blocks on time.
using efficient miners they can lower hashrate and still make blocks. due to the way mining works and how they calculated stats to plan it out before hand.
EG not only is 1 next gen 2x more hashes(thus only needing 1 next gen per 2 old gen). but with boost they can perform hashes sooner. so able to do adjust hashrate further but still stay in the target zone of blocktime

so with less asics running means less cost = more profitable to mine below the $5800 value baseline

which along with the VC funds release was what caused dipping below the $5800 value line.
difficulty dropped meaning asier to mine= cheaper to mine. and again abl to profit at lower prices.

..
now all we have to do is wait for the plateau or hashpower to rise and the cost value cycle to change

season 3 of "startup" is released the whole triseries mentions crypto all the time

also
a a new TV series called FBI mentioned bitcoin season 1 episode 6

you dont need to know satoshis wallet. or his identity.. just look at the blockchain.
its where everyones coins are.

peoples wallets do not contain the coins hidden away. the only thing in a wallet is the private key
this is the failure of buzzwords because a "wallet" should actually be called a "keyring"

coins are clearly and transparently listed on the blockchain. everyone can see when coins move.
the coins linked in the OP is not coins from the imfamous 2009-2010 stash

because your remotely working/communicating/trading funds.
using a payment system that does not require home postal information.

the first rule of bitcoin is self control and due diligence.

if you cannot grab someone or dont know about someone detailed enough to slap them with a wet fish(lawsuit).. dont trade/hand funds/work for/hand stuff to them. because if they wrong you, you cant slap them

it doesnt matter if newbie or legendary.
this is where scammers get to scam. because potential victims dont do due diligence.

i personally would never trade on this forums.. its too ripe of scammers. so i just dont bother in the first place.

keeping the extra byte is something core devs love as they can use that byte to add more opcodes. and also do some inflight forks/upgrades without disturbing older nodes

EG ELI-15 (very dumbed down example for general readers, dont knick pick length of position of bytes.. its just for display)
the old opcode

imagine a tx xxxxxxxxxxx~xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
imagine ~ was an opcode byte
they can at one point has just

(numbers in ascii upto 256)
~ is:
0=no action pass as acceptable without checking (anyone can spend)
1=do a
2=do b
.. and so on

they can the change it, so that if 0(ascii) selected that it now treats for new segwit nodes that 'do nothing'(anyonecanspend) is now 'follow segwit opcode list'
where segwit can then totally change what comes after ~
xxxxxxxxxxx~%xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

so then they can have a sub-list of opcodes(%) and different things. without having to change the original ~
then have the % have another sub opcode list

thus expanding and adding new opcodes without forcing nodes that only understand the original ~ or % as a short list
EG
0(~)=segwit
     00(~%)=segwit do nothing
     01(~%)=segwit do z
     02(~%)=segwit do x
1(~)=do a
2(~)=do b

^ nope

the funds are actually an exchange. not a early adopter.

and its very easy to spot if satoshi is spending. because funds from 2009 would be moving.
they havnt moved. so satoshi is not spending

you do realise that cores side put the mandated august 1st date into the event calender.
theres even adam-back tweeting that luke JR and samson mow and others, praising them doing a great job

the blockstream crew were funded by DGC.co.. which are the guys that also paid BLOQ (jgarzic) for the segwit2x
and also DCG.co was the NYA to sway the merchants of the DCG portfolio,
the splits was instigated by these.

all if it was to push segwit in. and to ban nodes that would object to it.
its even wrote in the blockchains.. segwit came first due to segwit drama of accept segwit or "f**k off".. the forks came hours LATER. (check timestamps)
funny part is those on cores side were actually highlighting the forks didnt make a block until hours later.. revealing the forks didn cause it.. but wording it as if the forks didnt have power to make their own fork.. both of which shows the forks didnt cause the split. (the split happened and nodes were left hanging unable to participate.. thus segwit one by excluding part of the community.. only then did the ignored nodes start new blocks HOURS later)

but hey. seems you are now more interested in the reddit script propaganda, rather than real info found in the blockchain itself, the codebases of nodes and the investor information.

whenever i see someone just repeating the reddit scripts of propaganda, i just think, i bet they watch fox news too

as for

thy are not creators. craig and ver are just social faces. their drama is of no significance, its just social stuff
they dont code

from what i seen through different stuff when in communication with people within the community/ crypto industry
theres alot of VC funding that goes behind the scenes OTC
VC's pay money to miners and set a contract for the VC to receive a planned amount of bitcoin at set times and set amounts. where its all calculated.
(this is where miners mine coins or buy coins if cheaper to buy than mine to fulfill VC contract)

then theres the less structured miners who decide to buy when its cheap on the market or sell on the market depending on profit/cost of mining

then theres separate VC deals where they have to buy coin to pay developers, business investments (november 2017 spike hint hint(which then got over-bought by speculators FOMO'ing))..
and some of these VC had a 12 month HOLD before they can sell.. (november 2018 hint)

then ofcourse theres the movements that occur when new asics or new batch prices and also noticable hashrate changes that occur.

all of this stuff is happening. and its not whales wanting to cause panic. its just market reaction to sudden change.

shouting out $1500.. or craig is responsible. ... now thats the panic/fud at work as it costs nothing to do social drama finger pointing

BCHSV and BCHABC are NOT THE CAUSE!!!

they knew as far back as the summer that new asics were coming which would make it cheaper for crtain farms to mine.
its the farms selling for profit while changing their asics.

the BCHSV and BCHABC drama is empty drama of no impact. they just timed it to be happening now to glory hound themselves to sound like they are the cause and to pretend they are influencers.

stop pretending they have power. their friggen altcoins. on a different network.
to even be able to tank the price they first need to convert their altcoin into btc to arbitrage the prices down.. and guess what. the market trading charts do not show this occuring

in short
costs of mining. involvement of mining. vs cost of buying coin. is variable depending on hashrate and how many asics and cost of asics.

now the reason why hashrate is an important indicator.
if people can buy coin cheaper than mining costs they will.. (bringing price up until corrected equilibrium)
if people can mine cheaper than buying coin they will.. (bringing price down until corrected equilibrium)
if miners can reduce cost to mine (cheaper rigs) they will sell (bringing price down until corrected equilibrium)
if miners have more competition(more hashpower/more cost) if mining cost more than price they will buy coin(until equilibrium)

which is all about "corrections" of speculation spikes and dips

people will always find the best way to get bitcoin. which is why the base VALUE of bitcoin circles around the mining cost.

its complicated psychology and math. which is why i tried to not fill in all the math and psych.

but right now at ~40exa the value AREA is:
very limited users can profit at bottom($3600)      however based on who has rigs($4600-$6100)
emphasis very limited amount of people can break even at $3600.
........
to get a baseline value of $1500 again the hashrate would be down at 16exahash and everyone would need to be using the latest efficient asics.
........

ill try to make it simple for people to calculate an indicator, and understand it all

take the current exahash (eg 40~)multiply by 89
(i done the math to make it simple as multiply by 89)
this 89 is based on current hardware costs IF ALL asics were next gen
hense baseline(bottom)

and the electric was 5cents/kwh and the hardware was 950 spread over a year. then the math of how many asics is required to hash a block. and divide it down to the costs and the costs per ptc

and thats the cost of mining and the baseline multiple to indicate base value .
big point. its the BASE multiple. THE LOW.

i say baseline because some are using S9(14thash 1.3kwh) at that exa multiple of 111 cost (each asic was $450 bought)
i say baseline because some are using S9(14thash 1.3kwh) at that exa multiple of 154 cost (each asic was $850 bought)
i say baseline because some are using S9(14thash 1.3kwh) at that exa multiple of 280 cost (each asic was $2000 bought)
i say baseline because some are using t15(28thash 1.6kwh) at that exa multiple of 89 cost (each asic was $950 bought)


a month ago the multiple was 111(bottom),
a couple month ago was 135 (mix)
a couple month ago was 154 (mix)
6 months-1year it was 280. (top)
(this 111 multiple was the base line for 12 months as that was the bottom cost of the last gen asics)

not everyone has such low cost of mining of the next gen 89 multiple. but some of the farms do. so an amount of influencers that can move price will be around that 89 multiple.
(they can sell down to the value of say 40exa * 89 and still break even profit)

after all
if a person can SELL bitcoin at profit for than mining it. they will.
but not everyone can because not all miners are at the 89 base multiple

but due to next gen asics the multiple is moving down to 89. (yep outsiders/hobbiests are not getting deliveries until last week of december, but yep some facilities are already using them.. (and manufacturers are cough cough profitably quality assurance testing hardware before december delivery to users))
so the value is not yet at the 89 multiple .. but the bottomline is a multiple of 89 of the exahash

i was hoping to see hashrate raise and lockout at above 60exa before the next gen release. but seem last month before the price drama. we seen them curve down the hashrate

........

the only reasons a fork suppresses adoption is that instead of 1000's of developers and businesses concentrating on one coin. they get diluted down to less concentrating on one network

imagine if coinbase, circle, bitpay concentrated all its efforts on promoting bitcoin adoption, instead of multicoin adoption
imagine all the exchanges that didnt just add random altcoin every week
imagine VC funding concentrated at multiple teams, businesses that only concentrate on bitcoin

but thats in a utopia where most devs actually innovate if they were to concentrate on one network...
rather than herd sheep into different fields (develop and promote different networks) where better grass is promised. but turn to mud within a short period

many countries around the world i have seen, look at bitcoin. see its initial promise of 2009-2013 and then see the situation of today. and decide its easier, cheaper and better to just play with an altcoin than to try to fight off all the lobbying of centralisation happening in bitcoin

pretty much its a spiral. making it harder to get into bitcoin. newbies to use something else. newbies try something else thus not expand bitcoin.. then old bitcoiners that were using bitcoin decide to also join the 'something else' thus less use bitcoin

1. first of all you trusting a team does not give reason to only have one. infact trusting a team and denying an option for more than one team is centralisation at its essense.
nothing wrong with you trusting one team. but denying other teams as an option is not decentralisation
oh and...
core announced a mega bug in their code that would DDos all core node at once running 0.14+ just a month ago.

2. oh your are mentioning the consoles have to connect to a server.. that again is echos of pools and centralisation..
this topic seems to sound less and less like a decentralisation effort. and more so just a way to sell games consoles..

3. within days of releasing consoles that can mine. someone with $10000 would buy a 50 consoles and hook them up as a pool
within a week someone with $1m will hook up 5000 consoles as a pool. and within a month you would see bigger investors with enough stock to have 500,000 consoles linked up as a pool. thus. all the idea of 'console' mining is doing is causing hashrate drama for a month before its back to usual of pool mining again.

4. oh and even PoS is becoming pooled. so dont think that console mining will be distributed for long, because PoW and PoS will always end up being pooled once it meets a certain threshold of greed/need.

think about it if a block is 12.5btc($63k) but only one 1 winner every 10 minutes. as soon as lets say 1million people want to mine. each user has to wait for "luck" of between 1-1mllion blocks to get $63k
they will naturally prefer to increase the odds and get a more regular income by pooling rather that a one in 20 year chance for just a one time win of $63k

5. people have already planned out putting a single asic chip into a LED WIFI controlled light bulb. thinking 'every house can mine'. problem was that other people already planned to snip off the LED filament end. and just have a rach of the asic bulb screw ends running

^ here is your issue

meaning the rest of your topic post is about DISTRIBUTION not decentralisation.
imagine a bug needing a recall of devices. or a firmware update. if everything is core then the recall/update ends up coming from a single central point

its the same as demanding all computers only run microsoft