His friend was a trader. He should have been be aware of the potential opportunity cost that he was taking away from the OP by borrowing the 0.1 BTC for a year. Unless there was a specific agreement stating otherwise the friend should repay the asset that was borrowed, not the cash equivalent from a year ago.

I guess he meant that the candle from 7th December could have formed into a shooting star (a reversal pattern) if that day truly marked the end of the current uptrend. But since that did not happen, then there is a strong probability that the current uptrend will continue and we will soon blow past the peak made in 7th Dec.

What denomination do you have?

Before proceeding upwards to $100K followed by a crash to $30K. If you short at $100K just don't make the mistake of waiting for cheap $20K coins because that won't happen.

While your bitcoins may be secure from hackers and thieves you never took into account operational security. You might get amnesia and all your coins will be lost. To me that is not very secure.

At which point in time should it have coins? How about as far back as 2010? 2011?

Congrats on taking the plunge. I remember your KnC BTC and LTC setups from back when. Got me thinking why the hell am I still working when I no longer need to? I guess I like my work, but if BTC hits $25K I really won't have any more excuses.

I don't get it. How would taking your coins off exchanges impact this directly? The CME Bitcoin futures are supposed to be cash-settled and marked-to-market daily. Nobody, neither the CME nor the market participants, need to hold a single bitcoin for the whole thing to work. Market participants would probably put up margin in cash and not bitcoins. They may hold bitcoins externaly to hedge, but that is not required.

You should have exported the private key from Multibit and imported it into a more modern wallet. You could also have tried the last release of Multibit Classic.

Also keep in mind that there have been recent social engineering hacks where high profile bitcoin holders have lost their coins because the hackers managed to transfer their mobile numbers to their own handsets. This was always accomplished by social engineering the phone company, with the hackers impersonating the owners and convincing the phone company they lost their phone and getting them transfer the service to a new phone.

If they managed to transfer your phone number to them, they could password reset your email, gain access to your cloud accounts, trading accounts, online storage, etc. basically make a complete mess out of your life. You need to protect your BTC from this attack vector, especially if you backup data on your phone to the cloud. Your phone may be physically safe but your line and cloud backups are not.

Edit: For example, if you have a gmail account with 2FA google authenticator and a backup phone-number, the 2FA can be disabled and the password reset by using the backup phone.

I seemed to recall that the reason for removing the orange was the computing resources it took to compute the color. Basically it was some computed attribute of the user that had to be recalculated periodically.

This happens periodically. Yesterday it happened again to me when I happened to place an order just after the BCH hash rate dropped and my order did not confirm in time. I opened a support ticket but they fixed the problem automatically even before answering the ticket. If you have paid the correct amount and the transaction confirmed you should be able to sort it out with them.

That may be so, but there are still very few places where you can spend BCH. And those big blocks are still mostly empty. BCH has yet to prove that big blocks are safe for the network. If big blocks are eventually proven to be safe, increasing the blocksize (perhaps by a more conservative amount) is something that core could easily adopt, negating any advantage of BCH.

You are aware that the network difficulty adjusts to the total hash power of the miners, don't you? Depending on how gradual the number of miners drop off you might not even notice it impacting the network transaction rate. Because the mining rewards reduce gradually when the last fraction of coin gets mined there won't be a large exodus of miners.

I actually did that recently. I sold 0.25 BTC for the $1000 reservation fee. Today the fee would have only been 0.14 BTC. Too bad you can get refunds in BTC.

It is difficult to get machines when mining becomes more than marginally profitable.

I have always bought from Bitmain directly, though you need to wait for availability. I even used some unwanted BCH to order some S9's from them very (they stopped accepting BTC) recently though they have not yet shipped.

Based on the last time I sold: less than 24 hours
Based on the oldest coin in my stash (assuming LIFO queue): 7 years

I have to say that these captchas don't work too well on spotty mobile connections - think commuting in an underground subway where there is only internet connectivity at station stops but nothing in between. Needless to say, the other day it took me 7 station stops (25 minutes) to login on my phone because the train did not stop long enough at each station for me to finish the captchas. And somehow I had to start over each time the connection was broken.

That does not make any sense at all. Your math and logic are fail.

Probably in the same way that the price of gold is manipulated through gold futures and ETFs. Basically if TPTB want to suppress Bitcoin's price they would trick the public into buying paper BTC (instead of actual BTC) while they sell the underlying that they have previously hoarded at a lower price.

This could happen if, for example, BTC futures became more accessible than actual BTC to the general investing public. The average InvestorJoe is more comfortable buying a futures-based BTC product through his BAML/Schwab/Fidelity/etc. brokerage account than opening a BTC exchange account at some incompetent startup that is not SSAE16 audited for compliance in protecting customer data. When the current crap exchanges talk about compliance they only think within the scope of AML/KYC compliance, which does not cover the protection the customer's private data at all.