This is true only if one uses a Free Libre Open Source Operating Software system such as GNU/Linux to store and / or enter the XBT private keys. If one uses a propriety operating system infected with DRM and linked to a cloud service such as those sold by Apple and Microsoft then the risk that the XBT private keys suffer the same fat as those celebrity nude photos still remains.

Edit: By the way the same applies to fiat banking credentials, so this is less a fiat vs crypto-currency issue than a propriety software vs FLOSS issue.

Going short on AAPL may well be a smart move in this market, especially when one considers the utter incompetence and complete disregard for user's security demonstrated by Apple in the "celebrity nude photos hack". I mean allowing the brute forcing of passwords with no account lock-down period. This is 2014 not 1964. My thoughts are that going long on XBT is the way smarter move just as was the case in early September 2012.

You are on the right chain as far as I can see. See below:

The sheer incompetence and complete disregard for end user security demonstrated by Apple on this is simply inexcusable. Slate has an excellent article that explains why. http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/09/celebrity_photo_hack_blame_apple_for_its_disregard_for_user_security.html

When it comes to Ethereum the ether itself may of many not meet the test, but I fail to see how the promise to create or deliver the ether in the winter or 2015/2015 does not meet the test.

https://www.ethereum.org/

I doubt there is going to be a different regulatory regime for Monero than for Bitcoin. The regulators are going to require the same AML/KNC in both cases and exchanges can avoid issues simply by requiring that crypto-currency withdrawals and deposits be to and from an address controlled by the owner of the account. A barrier to adoption of Monero by exchanges may actually be technical since Monero and other CryptoNote coins require additional programming on the part of the exchange for proper implementation.

Edit: IANAL I suspect that an exchange such as the, United States based, Poloniex will have way more regulatory risk in the United States with something like the SuperNET IPO - ICO https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=762346.msg8648210#msg8648210 than they will ever have with Monero.

My suggestion:

First do your own research. This is critically important! Then and only then consider the following allocation:

75% XBT (Bitcoin)
25% XMR (Monero)

It is certainly possible. I am not into day trading XMR at this time, being more a medium to long term holder, but 0.0036 - 0.0039 is certainly an attractive range to add to an existing XMR position.

Has anyone taken a look at the insane spike FRC/XBT had last year? http://www.cryptocoincharts.info/v2/pair/frc/btc/cryptsy/alltime There is actually a powerful buy and hold strategy here. Buy FRC, hold until a XBT/USD boom where one sells at say a 4000% profit gross in terms of XBT. After demurrage of say 10% for a little over a two year hold the profit in terms of XBT is only 3990%.  

Thanks

Actually those wishing to take a short position on XMR (Monero) can purchase put options here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=758443.0;all. Derivative markets allowing shorting of XBT and LTC also exist. So my question remains is there a similar market that allows for short positions on Goldcoin?

Does anyone know of a market where one can sell Goldcoin short?

So am I, since I am betting against the premine/ninjamine. Bytecoin is mired by a 83% premine/ninjamine allegation. So comparing Bytecoin to Monero is like comparing Tenebrix to Litecoin.

Edit: Does anyone know what the current market cap of Tenebrix is?

The real test of the BitsharesX concept list in comparing bitUSD/USD https://bter.com/trade/bitusd_usd with BTSX/XBT http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitshares-x/. At the recent low on August 29 in BTSX/XBT we saw bitUSD/USD trade at 0.71. This makes a lot of sense since the drop from the high in BTSX/XBT was over 50% resulting in the bitUSD being under capitalized and consequently the low price.

In short it appears that the prediction market would only work if BTSX/XBT does not drop enough to cause the bitUSD to be under capitalized.

Exactly. I stand corrected the correct term for bandwidth is Nielsen's Law. http://www.nngroup.com/articles/law-of-bandwidth/ and for storage Kryder’s Law http://www.digitaltonto.com/2011/4-digital-laws/. Moore's law applies to processing power. All three are applicable for XMR just as they were applicable to credit cards.

I must say that I am old enough to remember when credit cards were authorized, by the clerk looking up a paper list of cancelled cards (snail mail), calling the credit card company for authorization, and then came the technological innovation: Using a dial up connection for credit card authorization while people waited in line at the checkout for the modem to sync.

Or one can simply allow Moore's law to take care of the bloat problem. Comparisons with VISA are very relevant here. The question that needs to be asked here is could VISA have scaled to current levels using the computer technology available in 1959 when American Express and Diner's club were offering the first credit cards?

As for blockchain pruning in its various incarnations it is a very bad idea because the "bloated information" is freely available at one point. This would allow large centralized holders to save this information, hoard it and then sell it at a premium to the average person. A simple scenario here could involve a legal dispute between and individual and a tax authority over transactions that are years or even decades old. The tax authority would have access to the old blockchain data while the individual would have to purchase that same data from a commercial data hoarder at a premium, thereby putting the individual at a significant disadvantage.

No not much. Here is a graph that illustrates this issue very well. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=400235.4680 The prediction is that we will reach the 1MB blocksize limit somewhere between March and October 2015.

The main reason that people renounce United States citizenship is that the United States is one of only two countries in the world that levies income taxes on the basis of citizenship. They also coerce financial institutions around the world in order to enforce this tax collection on their customers. One of the results of this is that being a United States citizen makes a person persona non grata when seeking financial services in many parts of the world. Both of these reasons provide a powerful incentive for ex pat United States citizens to renounce their US citizenship.

Simple: Root the device, break the DRM and lock out the junk ads.

GNU/Linux desktop users are under 2% so you do have a point. It is also the case that the top 1% control 39% of the worlds wealth. http://www.cnbc.com/id/100780163. It may well turn out that one of the impacts of Bitcoin is that a person's choice in operating system software also has a high degree of correlation with their net worth. I am perfectly fine with that. What I must say is that if one waited for Apple to give IOS users permission to use Bitcoin those Apple users would pay between 400 and 700 USD per XBT while those of us like myself, who were very critical of Apple's back in 2011 and 2012 were busy buying XBT between at 2 and 6 USD per XBT. As for Windows I was busy removing Bitcoin stealing / mining malware from Windows computers back in 2011 for users who had no idea what Bitcoin was, yet they were mining Bitcoin!

I have no problem promoting Bitcoin to users of DRM infected propriety operating systems such as those sold by Apple and Microsoft, after all, us GNU/Linux users have to sell our XBT at a 10000% or more markup to someone. I do feel however that I have an ethical and moral responsibility to warn those same users of the risks they are taking and the opportunities they are missing by their choice in operating system software.