Where did you knew such thing as stablecoins being made by the 'Global Elite', a source link might be helpful to establish your point.

Almost all stablecoins existing are reflecting the US Dollar since it is one of the most used international currency, and thus reflecting it would be easier and more sensible. Almost all currency have trading pairs with USD, and US has ever since most dominant in the world, even in language.

A link to the supposed tweet is better. And I don't think there's any correlation to the recent pump. It might be about Iran, but could just be a FOMO made by the recent news about it being sold at a much higher price on Iran, which isn't entirely true. Also, I didn't notice any news about Musk's endorsement to Bitcoin. If you read the article, it wanted to point out that Tesla and Bitcoin could share the same price trend, though correlation isn't guaranteed.

It might just be another propaganda to spread FOMO on investors not actually living in Iran. Though an increase in market price could be possible, especially in P2P exchanges, and analyzing the situation in Iran where people could demand Bitcoin but being internet censored makes it more rare and thus more valuable in money. But its true that validation lead to conclusion that there's no significant price increase.

Hilarious stunt though. We all know he won't do it right at the start. $1 million predicition just doesn't make sense. Even though it would be possible on a logarithmic chart, the bitcoin's price isn't exponentially steady in uptrend. And that predicition is nothing but an attention-grab hype propaganda.

Should've TL;DR. Though overall, a good read. Certainly an eye-opener to what could be the deeper reasons why such censorship happens, and explains the implications beyond only those reasons that we obviously see right now. Google has been really the face of the internet, and thus being challenged with a decentralized framework is hurting Google's monopoly with their business model.

These scams normally starts by giving you hints of its fake legitimacy. And when you entertain such messages, that's where it starts to puzzle your mind as you ride their trickery. But one thing that is always used is the 'deposit first to get reward' type of method, which blows their cover. What I think is the best way to avoid these is just don't entertain anyone you don't know in the web, especially if its only on telegram.

The price is driven by local demand, and not adhering in global market standard. Since the internet has been censored, and exchanges are also retricted, that gives the actual market price, P2P exchange have sellers that actually increased the price based on the 'need' of such an asset. Although in my opinion, it's a blown up news. Though it could be also that the price is reasonable, and the tension in Iran really is drastic compared to what most of us knows outside Iran.

Too bad for you. I understand that the bull run brings FOMO to you, but riding on a market that's been riding for quite a time is generally a bad idea. Though this year might get you off. If you have some of that left, you might even exit the market for a return or even gains. But that's 2 years ago, not sure if you still have those.

Don't easily fall on such scams, especially in Telegram and other social sites. Always remember that once you sent your Bitcoins, there's no turning back. Also, right from the start where he said that high returns are guaranteed is surely a scam. Recently, there are also scams on YouTube claiming that you'll get 30x of the coins you sent on an address.

This is one manifestation of how economic problems theoretically could increase demand in Bitcoin. Though contrary to most believe, Bitcoin couldn't solve economic problems of countries. It could just act as another alternative currency when the one provided by the government fails, like the situation in Venezuela. Or a store of funds rather than store it as fiat in local central bank.

These are businesses your talking about. They have audits, and in the most simplest words, they want/need to profit, and not to lose money. Sure, it's easy to say that businesses could disregard failed transactions, but put yourself in their shoes. Would you want your business to run on a payment mode that the payments of your customers aren't guaranteed to be received?

If you're a rich person and doesn't care about profiting, then it might be fine for you. But most businesses are built for the owners to gain money, and losing money on using a payment system not that reliable for transactions sounds too experimental.

Bitcoin needs to address the issue first before being adopted wide-scale, and it needs to happen on the largest companies first.

If nukes are going to be bombed on most data centers and ISPs gateways, and the attack is serious enough to cripple everything business related, then you're probably right.

But if this war never escalated up to that point, there's no shutting down that would happen. Market would just crash. You also have to understand that internet is decentralized, as well as Bitcoin's network. It's a mesh network, and a shutdown on a specific place would not affect the others, it would continue to run, with or without those affected servers, if that location/server ever finds an alternative route of data to be accessed. Bitcoin would only shut down if each and every node is destroyed.

Also, I do believe wars happen in phases, and not just a single blow. The early stage, people, especially the powerful and rich ones, would find alternative place to store their wealth. And as long as there is a copy of bitcoin's ledger somewhere, his/her bitcoins would stay alive. That might be valuable after the war, and the digital age comes in. And that's one reason people might look into cryptocurrencies when the war has been declared.

The mid-stage, where countries bomb each other off, is where most companies are just closed, and no one really cares anymore than surviving.

Then the later stage comes in, where those who survives would have their funds store somewhere, assets that they still have, and since cryptocurrency isn't a physical, destroyable thing, it would still be existing.

Although there is none that can tell whether a time would be absolutely perfect to buy, I do think right now is quite feasible in buying Bitcoin. The price is still low, and we're just a few months before the halving, which is the time we're about to expect the start of another bull run.

With big investments, long-term would be better than short-term or trading. Just invest the amount you're ready to lose, don't get emotional on drastic price changes, and be ready to hold for extended periods of time. If you're not short in funds, then buying now would likely be a profit.

Why would they leave if they knew taxation on cryptocurrencies are out of the way? They 'might' leave, if the temporary memorandum would be ammended, stating that cryptocurrency investments would be under income tax. But the news you linked looks in the positive side, and might encourage more investors to risk/invest their money on cryptocurrencies.

One implementation I'm thinking for such idea, if you have heard of HTCs phone running a full node, then transfers using bluetooth, consider having a wallet application for mobile phones, could relay transaction details to a full node, whether be it an actual computer with bluetooth card, or a phone running a full node, could make it easier to transfer Bitcoins even when you're offline. Like hotspots for you to conduct transactions, though security might be a concern from different weakpoints in the device, and the encryption of transfer of data.

I'm assuming that you posted this because of the recent pump almost $200 up yesterday, which is a clear sign of manipulation just looking how steep that line is, indicating that a whale must have entered the market and flooded the buy orders. Then it's only going sideways for at least 10 hours now with no signs of demand increase, took a recent dump maybe because it has been considered a resistance level, then another possible pump by a whale.

It looks like a continuous uptrend since mid-2019, and it's generally a good sign of miner adoption, though not real adoption by different sectors as a currency. We could also see here that contrary to most people think, hash rates don't correlate to adoption, and thus to price, which is not the case. Nevertheless, having known such increase in hash rates indicates more full nodes are running in the network, which is good.

I don't think it is dependent on those with largest market share. They don't contribute anything to the hashing power. Those that matter are the full nodes, and the honesty of those nodes. If an attacker, say using 51% attack methodology, gets a hold of nodes larger than half of the whole network nodes, then they could generate more longer blockchain than that honest blockchain, making double spending possible.

As your argument says so, Bitcoin is also centralized partially in nodes located in China. Apply the same logic/analogy to internet. These partial centralization is only among ISPs, that conform to a gateway to reach other parts of the world. Without them, it would be hard to lay your own cables and build infrastructure that would interconnect all the Bitcoin nodes. And even we are partially 'centralized' because of ISPs purpose to run our network, they still provide us freedom to what we do and connect to on the internet since it is our right, and doesn't really affect the decentralization of the network.

While somewhat a good news, Bitcoin is not meant to be an asset, but rather a mode of payment, a currency. And so this news is good for speculating investors, but for true adoption to happen, people must not see it as an asset but rather a currency that they could actually use in alternative for fiat currency.