This is so true.

Another way of scamming people is to create a lot of "signals" regularly and these scammers use social media (eg. twitter or telegram). Basically they buy a shitcoin then start advertising it as a "good shitcoin to buy" so that after others bought it and price went up, they could dump it and make profit while others bag-hold and lose money.
They are easy to recognize too because if anybody had a "good signal" they wouldn't be giving it away for free or even for money. They'd invest themselves and make a lot of money.

These are entirely different and irrelevant arguments involving bitcoin price which has nothing to do with the decentralized versus centralized subject. When you use centralized currency you are still at the mercy of the centralized authority, if they want to charge back the money you received they can do it easily, if they want to shut down your account they can do it in a blinking of an eye, if they want to put their hands in your pocket and take some of your money they can do that too, and a lot more. They can't do any of it when you use decentralized money.

You should not want to do that because ebay is centralized and it doesn't mix well with decentralized money. There is already alternatives  such as openbazar that are more decentralized and are suitable.

What I think is that ETF is not the only way we can reach $500k or even a million in the next couple of years although it can be a decent catalyst. In fact you should have seen my predictions a couple of years ago saying in this cycle (the one starting after 2018) price should have reached the ATH of $400k to $500k. I still believe that my prediction was correct, the only problem was the unprecedented economic events on a global scale which is what makes the prediction harder than any other time.

That's True.

It was last year that I said this deal is only going to benefit NATO while the propaganda machines in Europe were constantly talking about helping Africa with the deal. It was obvious from day one that Europe is desperately trying to fill their storages and diminish the effects of the food crisis in EU.
Today the stats are also showing that they did steal the food that was supposed to go to poor countries such as Africa. It is a lot higher than reported in the news.

The only reason why propaganda machines are active again and severely brainwashed people like OP are talking about food security in the "world" is because after this deal was broken Europe will start experiencing the food crisis that was going on in places like Africa to some extent.

P.S. This could also be another reason why US is increasing tensions in West Asia by destabilizing the whole region by activating its terrorist proxies considering that this is the land based route that is being established that could move goods including food stuff to Africa (and elsewhere) much quicker and safer without EU or US being able to steal any of it...

The subject is too silly! First of all fiat currencies don't default, the governments default on their national debt. It also is not limited to Russia, it is true about all fiat currencies since every single government has been printing fiat nonstop and increasing the national debt which they eventually default. The only difference is the size of that debt and the speed at which it grows.
By all measures US dollar is the worst since it has has the fastest speed at which the national debt grows not to mention that it also has the biggest debt of all times which US government defaulted just recently.

https://www.usdebtclock.org/world-debt-clock.html

They are all scam and some even give you trojans and stuff like that. If they were real and contained such massive amounts of bitcoin, they wouldn't have sold them in first place!

If you want to waste computing power and electricity it is much more profitable and productive to start mining some GPU minable PoW shitcoins and dump them in exchanges for bitcoin. There are a bunch of "whattomine" websites that can guide you and also there is a altcoin mining board which you can read and learn more.

Do you seriously not understand the difference between centralized fiat (and its alternatives) and decentralized money that is bitcoin after 2 years of being in this forum? Or are you just joking around with this?

What is the name of the wallet you are importing your key into? Because the 3 highlighted statements above make that tool sound very suspicious since this is not the normal behavior of a normal wallet.
A normal wallet doesn't generate uncompressed keys but allows you to import or sweep them.
A normal wallet also doesn't require a signature when you import your key!
A normal wallet also doesn't have a "mining" option let alone with a 50BTC reward specially since the current reward is for a block is 6.25!

It's not possible to know motivation of all of them but this is pretty similar to using keys in low ranges (eg. key=1) and using known keys (like the one in bitcoin wiki page) or known mnemonics (eg. test vectors) or the silly brainwallets.
The reasons go from a silly "treasure hunt" which is basically a donation to anybody who can get there faster, to mistakes people made when testing these things with real money.

Basic mathematics including combination which we learned in high school is not going to help you break ECC or solve ECDLP. Not to mention that one could find this information with a quick search in Google since as I said this is basic math.

SEC estimated these years based on a simple extrapolation and haven't updated the document ever since
This is why the table 3 in Standard for Efficient Cryptography v2 states that ECC with 128-bit security level (256-bit key size) protects until year 2040 (2030 is for ECC-224).
https://www.secg.org/sec1-v2.pdf

I believe the number is also based on MIPS years, that is the estimated amount of work performed in one year by a computer operating at the rate of one million operations per second. The values in SEC.1 v2 are from 2009.

Interest in joining BRICS from all countries even from US-slave countries like France, shows the New World Order and the weakening of United States and the fiat they keep printing called dollar! However, this "weakening" is slowly happening and I don't think the chances of a catastrophic collapse is that high right now hence bag holding a lot of dollars in reserve while slowly dumping it as China is doing is the low risk move.

P.S. Is there any source that shows China's reserve currencies explicitly separated by their type? Because it seems like all sources including the state administration report an aggregated value of all assets (not just dollars) converted to dollar, it even states the change in value is due to "asset price changes" and I know some sources like worldbank reporting the $3.17 trillion include China's gold reserves in it.

As much as I like bitcoin but it is not yet ready for mass adoption, the price of it is too unreliable for such a large long term commitment like what BRICS countries are making. Imagine if you buy a million barrels of oil (what oil tankers usually carry) worth $80 million in bitcoin and the price drops by 10% which is a normal thing in bitcoin. That is $8 million loss. That's not favorable.
However a centralized currency created and controlled by them is a lot more reliable because they dictate its value (exchange rate) so it can be kept fixed.

At this point bitcoin is good for small size trades and as a small portion of the reserved assets of the country.

That looks more like a dead cat bounce than a pump. A real pump is what happened in April and ended just as abruptly too when price reached 360+ satoshi (50%) or in November last year from 310 to 760 (145%).
Any pump now should be going back to above 300 sat at least, not what happened past week with a tiny rise from 213 to 240 satoshi (12%).

I also have no clue what any of this have to do with Hollywood!

That's a good point. I have been wondering about this too and I wonder whether in the future the replacement for dollar is going to be one or more CBDC.

I suppose it is possible too because a CBDC is technically a new currency and can have different characteristics. I'm just theorycrafting here but something like digital-yuan (the Chinese CBDC currently in use) could have a fixed exchange rate but be only used within the bloc between "friendly" countries while with others (like US and EU) they trade using the old methods with the old always-decreasing exchange rates to stay in competition.

That way they could solve the problem with fiat in international trades to some extend while replacing dollar in most of their trades decreasing their dependence on it.

That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard, although pretending to support bitcoin from candidate wannabes is not a new thing. It happened in the past elections in US too.

But this is dumbest because it is not even possible to do so. For starters POTUS is not capable of making such a fundamental change. The regime decides these things and they won't allow strengthening of bitcoin that threatens existence of the dollar.
Secondly due to the gigantic amount of dollar the the regime has printed so far the exchange rate they have to set for bitcoin (to be backing the dollar) has to be something like $10 million per bitcoin. That means shooting the price up and US is not capable of accumulating that much bitcoin to back its massive amount of worthless dollars.
Finally bitcoin is not gold that they can fool the world with by saying they have the backing gold safe and sound. They'd have to publish an address which anybody could verify and the world will know instantly if they break the ratio which we know they have no other choice but to do that. Over the past couple of months ever since the debt ceiling was raised they printed over a trillion dollars!!!

Not returning someone else's money you've found is stealing in my books, so obviously I'd return such a thing but most importantly I don't want others to do something like this to me (not return my money if I lose it some day) so I don't do it to others.

It's fine to have no witnesses (zero length).
In a transaction with witness you have to have the same number of witness stacks as your inputs so when you have 7 inputs you have to have 7 witness stacks but some of those outputs that are being spent (like first and second) are legacy so there is no witness needed hence the empty witnesses (OP_0) but the others (like the third) have a witness stack hence the 4 items in that stack.

That's not it.
I'd say this is a terrible code to have in a library because it is supposed to handle things that are different and are not supposed to be treated or handled the same way.
For starters it is handling scripts and witnesses which are entirely different things. Scripts are scripts! They contain OP codes including PUSHDATA and are supposed to be interpreted to "build" the stack with the "operations" you have to perform. Hence the 4 branches handling 0x4c,0x4d,0x4e.
On the other hand witness is already a stack, it is not-supposed to be interpreted and it does not include OP codes including PUSHDATA. It only has count and size. The code also assumes you have read and discarded the count.

In simple terms this method handles apples and oranges at the same time which is why it looks weird.

In a script you have OP_PUSHDATA1 so the first 4 branches handle those with a condition that it is not-witness so that they know what data to "push to the stack" while the last branch (the else part) is handling the witness (not SegWit output or address) so it has to read a var_int (aka compact_int) indicating the size of the item that is already on the stack.

A quick way to determine if a wallet is not using deterministic signing is to sign a transaction twice and see if the hash changes. If it did, the wallet is not using RFC6979 but if it didn't you still have to check the code to make sure.
Message signing should also work since the process is the same.