Unless IMF starts some sort of "sanction" on countries that have adopted bitcoin (stuff like rejecting loans and putting pressure on them like that), I don't see how publishing an "opinion" about bitcoin can have any kind of consequences in countries and their adoption of bitcoin.

There are a couple of reasons that contributed to economic growth in El Salvador and bitcoin is only one of them. For example end of the pandemic and increased tourism and attracting more foreign investment are some of those reasons.
But of course IMF existing to fulfill American interest should be fearful of bitcoin adoption specially in places where it replaces US dollar (El Salvador doesn't have its own fiat and uses dollar).

I disagree.
People don't really understand a lot of things they are using including fiat. Nobody knows how "dollar" works, majority of people don't even know the difference between money and currency or the fact that dollar is not money.
The thing is, what people refer to "understanding" is just being used to something. You may not know how your computer works but you are still using it to post here.

It's the same with bitcoin. Under the hood it is complicated but for the end user it is actually pretty easy and straight forward to use. The only thing is that bitcoin is different from what people are used to and they all want to understand it at technical level.
For example you don't really see people ask about the cryptography used in the credit/debit card most people use every day, yet they use it. But you always see them question how 256-bit elliptic curve is secure when it comes to bitcoin!

The gas price went down but it didn't go back down to previous levels, it stayed higher than those prices. Also don't forget that gas started being exported mainly as LNG to Europe which is a lot more expensive than the regular thing Russia used to export through the pipelines.

BTW the "us_gas_price" link you shared seems to be the "petrol" price which they call "gas" as in something you put in your car not the gas you pump into homes, industries, etc.
You should also keep in mind that US retail prices is not the same as export prices. They've actually kept it down well enough to decrease the domestic economical impact.

This seems to be a more appropriate chart at least for US prices: https://ycharts.com/indicators/us_natural_gas_liquefied_exports_price

The negative effects of US economy slowly falling apart seems to have practically vanished from bitcoin market. Apart from CPI we also have the US stock market in a pretty ugly shape with continued dumps. For example S&P 500 has been dumping all through February, that's even despite the market makers' attempts at reviving the market with pumps in January.

If this trend continues we could start seeing bigger bitcoin price rises in the coming months and possibly even going back closer to more realistic values for bitcoin than the current undervalued state that got stuck.

You are just giving your personal interpretation of "Full Nodes".

Satoshi didn't invent Bitcoin to see what it turns into in the future and say "what the heck, it turned into a cloud storage that died afterwards". We also didn't adopt bitcoin thinking it can turn into a shitcoin by letting people who don't even run full nodes themselves upload garbage to other people's computers!

That is what they say before creating a new centralized shitcoin created and controlled by the government or the banksters and call that CBDC claiming it is solving all the problems because it is using the "technology behind bitcoin".

It is not just not-the-best, it is wrong. When shitcoins can magically summon market cap out of thin air. For example 72 million eth is premined and is not all in circulation but contributes to its fake market cap value, that's about $115 billion of the total market cap (roughly 60% of this shitcoin's market cap) and that's just one shitcoin. Ripple foundation pulls supply in the billions out of their behind. eth classic doubled its supply to keep its rank up in the fake MC list, ...

Bitcoin adoption as a means of payment has always been growing consistently and that is the only thing that matters. The degree of that adoption is not.

When the first vehicle was invented, you couldn't use it to go everywhere. You couldn't travel between cities, you couldn't even go as fast a carriage with horses, etc. Not many people wanted that hardship either but that didn't mean the "car" had to be changed so that it can wash your dishes, iron your clothes, etc. to be adopted!
It's the same with the brand new innovation called Bitcoin. Just because it hasn't yet reached mass adoption where you can see every Joe in the streets using it, that doesn't mean we should add nonsense on top of it and fool ourselves into thinking we are helping its adoption.

If I convert a movie to hexadecimal and then start a topic on bitcointalk and post the raw bytes here in one or more posts would you continue calling bitcointalk a forum or a movie sharing platform? Would I have not [ab]used bitcointalk for something it is not meant for?

Not all blockchain based apps are scams but all of them are useless and all of them can be done in a much better way without the blockchain. The platform called ethereum and the project itself is a scam though.

If the law and regulations are broken you should fix that instead of trying to add more complications on top of it.
In other words there is nothing stopping the government from forcing you to go through all the same bureaucracy, brokers, .... even if you are using a 100% decentralized token on a 100% decentralized platform.

Apart from the fact that OP seems like advertising a twitter account, these things start from attacking ICOs and shitcoins and then could continue into attacking bitcoin itself. After all IMF is an American organization and obeys and fulfills US interests, one of which is preservation of United States Dollar and bitcoin is another serious threat to it's dominance.

So the real question is not about what IMF says but how much countries care about it (or forced to care about it)?

When you are thinking of BIP148 don't think about WHAT it activates, but think about HOW it activates it (or rather wants it activated) and maybe you understand my view better.

You are confusing two separate matters. There is a difference between "wanting SegWit" and "wanting SegWit at any costs". Majority of people wanted SegWit but only a handful wanted it at any cost. And that is what BIP148 is, going against what has worked in all bitcoin soft-forks (eg reaching 95% majority) and splitting the network threatening bitcoin's security, reliability and blockchain's immutability just to activate SegWit.
In fact if you paid attention in those days you would have seen a lot of users state that they do not want SegWit IF it leads to a chain split.

It is like that more than you think. There is no clause in the proposal to check what the network thinks (ie. miner's vote), it just dictates that anybody who wants the change (whatever it is, whether SegWit or bcash or can be anything else in the future) can reject any block that doesn't activate it and split the chain!!!
That goes against everything bitcoin stands for and it is a malicious attack.

You are confusing different things that aren't related.
The oil price wasn't negative itself, oil was still expensive so was gas and they still are. But in a short period of time when US was torn apart by COVID pandemic the demand for oil dropped so much that the companies couldn't use the oil they were receiving on ships as fast so they remained on ships for a long time. The cost of just shutting down your shipping business and letting the ship holding the oil on sea is a lot more than just dumping it for free so they started giving discounts and even paid to get rid of the oil hence the "negative price".

You have to remember that energy (gas, oil, electricity, ...) doesn't just magically appear at your doorstep! A lot of effort is put into its extraction, purification, processing, shipping, conversion, ... and it all costs a lot of money.

I liked the general outline but some of your points are overreaching. For example:
- There are always something terrible happening to centralized services, whether by getting hacked or simply going bankrupt because of having a stupid business model. It is not specific to a certain period in the bitcoin market. The way it is used is different though, during a downtrend it will be portrayed as the end of the world and during an uptrend it is largely ignored and forgotten.

- There are always idiots on the internet who are bashing bitcoin regardless of what trend it is on. Like negative statements from Buffet during the 2017 rise.

- There are always shitcoins that are being pumped and dumped in all bitcoin market situations. ie. the EOS thing you mentioned near the end is nothing special. Same as NFT, DeFi, etc. even though the "hype" part of them thrives better during bitcoin bull markets compared to bear markets.

Lets not forget that regardless of what CMC website calls this percentage, it has nothing to do with actual dominance. This value is simply representation of a ratio computed by dividing 1 market capitalization by sum of 22669 market capitalizations (1/22669=0.00004)!

As they keep creating new shitcoins and shittokens and as the existing shitcoins create new circulating supply out of thin air (like XRP printing millions in a blinking of an eye) this ratio goes down. At some point there will be quadrillion and quintillion shitcoins in circulation turning that ratio to below 10%.

Being a full node has never been about "supplying" the data to others, it has always been about fully verifying everything for yourself. Although since the P2P protocol is a two way street they do also provide the fully verified data to others.

Argentina has also been increasing its trades in other currencies other than US dollar. Argentina and China have been trading using the Chinese currency (Yuan) and Argentina and Brazil have been developing a joint currency called "sur" meaning South that is working like Euro but in South America replacing dollar completely in the region.

We are also seeing a lot of countries in Asia dumping dollar from east to west including the NATO member Turkey.
In the latest news Iraq dumped US dollar for its oil trades and replaced it with Yuan.

This is a very interesting comparison that without money but with innovation you can create a new form of money that after 13-14 years it still stays on top and continues growing while even with billions of dollars but without any innovation you can only create a very hyped up shitcoin that only pumped for 4 years and have been dumping for the past 5-6.

AKA a bankster.

Bitcoin was never perfect and is not supposed to be perfect. It is better than the existing monetary system though.

That is correct, the altcoins as a whole is a failure not just some centralized service falling apart, but they are failed as projects.

And it is a million percent above its initial value! It is also worth twenty thousand times more than US dollar!
Of course a bankster sees that as a failure

In other words he said "centralized shitcoins are bad" which we all agree!
It also has nothing to do with bitcoin and we all agree with that too.

Maybe, or maybe because bitcoin makes people like him obsolete. It's like the steam engine that made many jobs and people in them obsolete.

There really isn't any difference between dollar and yuan. Both are centralized unlimited fiat currencies that are printed by a centralized government and are devalued over time. That means adopting Yuan by Brazil for their trades is not going to hurt them any more than adopting dollar did.

It both does and doesn't. We have to consider all the effects of this war.

On one hand What you said is correct and another negative impact is that high energy price and the global competition that's been happening is creating recession in US and the US economy is hurting badly. With non-stop money printing dollar is inevitably losing value.

On the other hand the US regime is heavily increasing its income through 4 major exports that would have never happened without this proxy war. They are oil, gas, food (eg. wheat, corn, etc.) and weapons.
For example without the proxy war with Russia the gas price would have never reached this high and US would have never had this much demand for their super expensive LNG. Russia needed to cut off gas export to Europe for Europe to be forced into buying US LNG.
Same with the other 3.

The real question is, how much longer this trend can continue before it all falls apart? What if the 70's is repeated and Europe dumps dollar again?

To none of them as we should.
The support should be with the majority even if the majority isn't going for a proposal which was the case with BIP148. Bitcoin can not and will not survive if the minority succeeds to enforce its opinion on the rest of the network. After all that is the main reason why we consider bcash a shitcoin!

It depends on the bank and the way you are accessing your account. The passphrases can be simpler or more complicated (short or long).

Bitcoin does not use RSA anywhere in its protocol.

Wrong. It still takes a quantum computer much longer than that to be able to solve ECDLP.