Let's try to think what sort of chunk of global economy Bitcoin can reasonably take. It's current market capitalization is 454 billion dollars. The global economy is worth around 86 trillion dollars, so Bitcoin is currently worth 0.5% of the global economy. But there are big companies worth up to $2.51 trillion (Microsoft), which is 3%. Let's be very maximalist and assume that Bitcoin will reach more than any company, up to 10% of the global economy. Neglecting the change in supply (because that change is quite gradual and the vast majority of BTC were mined anyway), that means Bitcoin that reach 20x of its current price (to be worth 10% of the global economy), which is $460,000. Of course, the global economy can rise as well, but its growth is also gradual (it's not like it will rise by a lot any time soon). So there you go, $500,000 is a very generous yet also reasonable price limit, but it's not absolute.
We could set higher percentage than 10, and compare Bitcoin to something else. Then the limit can increase. But I'd still calculate it accounting for the global GDP and for Bitcoin market capitalization.

Given that others names the traits of a recession already, I'll comment on whether it's coming. I think the US economy is entering a recession (or, as I've heard some people call it, 'something that will feel a lot like recession). Maybe it's not fully showing yet because we're at a start. But to be fair, I don't think it's just the US; it's the global economy trend which is expected every once in a while and then with the pandemic it was supposed to become evident at some point.

I'd say that mining it with a browser is impossible if we're talking about strong coins, but whether your statements about PCs is true depends heavily on the PC in question. If it's a very strong gaming PC with a high-end GPU like NVIDIA 3080, I think you can mine Ethereum and some other coins there, and the profits are likely to be small but they might occur if your electricity is cheap.
But as for browsing, I agree it's a bad idea. Aside from a big chance of being scammed, browsers tend to suck out a lot of juice from a PC as is, and with mining it can become a very unpleasant experience.
I'm happy that op seems to think it's a waste of time.

They must be very proud that they reduced it by 15%, but with everything going on (mass murders of civilians and PoWs, torture, indiscriminate attacks, heavy shelling and near-total destruction of several cities and towns), it's more like an insult that serious caring about terrible things Russia is doing for that money it gets from other countries, including the EU. Just look at these [urlhttps://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/06/1bn-for-ukraine-35bn-for-russian-energy-eu-chief-calls-out-funding-gap]terrible proportions [/url]of how much the EU is sponsoring the war via energy payments and how much it's compensating for this sponsorship in aid to Ukraine. It's not as bad as in used to be in April when the article was published, but it's still nowhere near even equal payments to Russia vs help to Ukraine, so it's not even balanced out.
Some EU countries are doing amazing things for Ukraine, but others are doing way more harm than good.

I'd stay away from Initial whatever Offerings, as previous rotations have shown that it's a dangerous venue where one is extremely likely to get scammed (whether by not getting the tokens or getting useless tokens that don't go anywhere) or just fail (because once a coin makes it to exchanges, it gets heavily dumped). Sure, you can reach awesome profits if you get lucky, but it's way too risky for me. I'd rather wait for a coin to make it to coingecko/coinmarketcap, not get totally dumped, and then consider investing. You might lose some potential profits, but you also reduce the risks heavily this way.

I don't know this website, so my trust to the report is quite low. Germany allowed Bitcoin investments, okay. Is it enough to become #1? And US, where due to the sell tax you're basically expected to pay taxes each time you sell BTC for fiat, no matter how low the sum, is #2? Ukraine is very low, even though it's a very crypto-friendly country where many use cryptos for all sorts of purposes, taxation isn't enforced because cryptos aren't fully regulated, and where even the government on the highest levels is accepting crypto donations. And then there's El Salvador, obviously the most crypto-friendly country in the world because Bitcoin is legal tender there and the state is very pro-Bitcoin, and yet it's #35.

I didn't know about this regulation because it seems like a US thing, and I've never had a US bank account. To be honest, I'm finding a hard time trying to understand how it works because it seems that it doesn't apply to al cases and that it was suspended for the time of the pandemic (and remains suspended) but some banks enforce it anyway. And it's only for savings accounts, right? I agree it's all easier with Bitcoin and bank fees can be ridiculous, but Bitcoin also has transaction fees which might amount to solid sums from time to time (although not over the last year or so), but it seems this regulation only applies to certain types of withdrawals, on a particular type of account, isn't enforced on the federal level (it's enforced only by some individual banks), and the fee also varies greatly.

1) Who will receive the ball first?  JAX
2) Will JAX cover the -2.5 point spread?  Yes
3) Game total 33.5?  Over
4) Highest scoring Quarter?  2nd
5) JAX total points?  Odd
6) LVR total points?  Odd
7) Most Rushing yards?  JAX
8 ) Most Passing yards?  LVR
Final Score prediction  19-17 JAX

A weird question to ask if you mean 'a' as 'one', since from what google tells me, one metric ton of gold is worth $46.7 million, whereas 1 Bitcoin is worth $23.7k. If I was offered the amount of gold that is worth the same in dollars as one Bitcoin, I'd undoubtedly take Bitcoin. But if we take 1 BTC vs tens of millions of dollars worth of gold, then gold in he obvious choice. You can't equate Bitcoin and its denominations with grams or tonnes. Weight and number are two quite different things. Overall, I think Bitcoin is way more practical and has more prospects than gold, but gold is way more stable in terms of value.

Game 1: 10' 2-0 Arsenal
Game 2: 10' 1-0 Southampton

As always, countries which are already struggling will struggle even more (low-income countries), and the strongest ones will be alright. If the war is a big deal, even if we think of it from a mid-term economic perspective instead of a moral one (which I believe should dominate instead), then why not focus on stopping the war? We have one obvious aggressor here, and while it's a mighty aggressor, the world has more power and could, with proper policies, get it out of the way. Ukraine is asking for more weapons, which is unfortunately what we need. But if the world truly united against Russia economically, ensuring that Russia doesn't get money for exports, the war would be over very fast due to a total economic collapse of Russia. But no, countries keep giving Russia billions of dollars because of fearing recession and not being willing to work actively on alternative solutions for their gas and oil problems, and then of course Russia has even more money to keep waging the war. In the end it will have a much bigger effect on global economy than if cutting economic tied with Russia was implemented very swiftly and decisively, but hey, humans aren't very good at long-term thinking and oh no, 2% recession is a way bigger deal than people dying and being tortured when it could be prevented.

I know that the overpopulation isn't really a risk, and yes, I've heard that it's going to stabilize. We have much bigger issues than the number of people and whether over population spike is a problem. For example, apparently, it's still unclear to some countries that conquering land and waging a war for it is not okay. It's also unclear to many that if there's a giant long-term problem we know for certain is going to be a big deal, we can't just ignore it, remain skeptical and focus on things that happen over one's time in office (I'm talking about climate change). It's also, unfortunately, not obvious that profits can't be more important than reducing the human suffering, fighting war crimes, not allowing concentration camps and stuff like that.
I also think it's unfair to say that the number of resources grow slower than the population (like the lady in the video) because the problem is NOT that there isn't enough resources to provide basic housing, food and medicine for everyone on the planet, it's just that the resources are distributed in an incredibly unfair way, when some have more than they can ever use in their lifetime, while others are dying from hunger.
Similarly, stopping the anti-migration stuff and opening up borders more to encourage redistribution of the populations could help some countries solve their underpopulation, and others overpopulation issues.

If we're talking about spending (not selling for fiat, not buying BTC, not trading), then it's 0.002 BTC when the price was around $40k+. It was roughly $100, if I remember well, and I spent this money on buying two hoodies, but also as a charity thing, which is why it's more than I'd probably spend just on a random hoodie on a shop. Unfortunately, I haven't spent much BTC directly because of a lack of ways of doing it. I wouldn't spend Bitcoin on something I wouldn't otherwise buy, and things I do spend money on usually aren't those easily available for purchase in BTC.

I believe that people should learn about basic safety of storing and using Bitcoin before investing into it, but that the main risk of investment is the price volatility, not stolen coins. If you do everything right, your coins will be safe. They get stolen if you stored the coins on a centralized platform where the keys aren't yours, or if you're very negligent with your seed. And because you store the coins yourself, there's more responsibility for it (you can't ask an authority of some sort to freeze your account, restore your access to it or reverse a transaction), but that's the trade-off of financial freedom.
If your coins were stolen, the chance of getting them back is very low. But sometimes it can be possible if there's certain data available, and if people know what they're doing. I once helped a friend save BTC when a situation was quite dark (not out of deep knowledge, though, but merely out of luck and cold mindset when it was important). I also got lucky once with recovering 40% of my funds on a platform that performed an exit scam (I was very new to cryptos back then and didn't know about the 'not your keys, not your coins' thing), but it was also about luck, not expertise. I do know that there are some successful cases when authorities catch the criminals and seize funds, which victims can sometimes get in return. And I also know that sometimes, when there's some data available and some data lost, it's possible to get help from experts and recover the coins (not in the case they're stolen, though, but rather when you accidentally lock yourself out of access).

Since we don't know anything about Satoshi's real-life identity, I'd use 'they' (as an indefinite pronoun) instead of 'he' when talking about this person. It is possible that Satoshi is dead, and that would explain the lack of activity with the so-called Satoshi's coins. It's also possible that Satoshi continues to monitor the forum from time to time, just to see what's going on, from a different profile. It is also likely that Satoshi moved on completely onto something different. I hope this person is out there, enjoying life and feeling fulfilled.

13) Amanda Nunes
12) Brandon Moreno
11) Derrick Lewis
10) Alex Perez
9) Anthony Smith
8 ) Matthew Semelsberger
7) Drew Dober
6) Dontale Mayes
5) Rafa Garcia
4) Michael Morales
3) Ji Yeon Kim
2) Nicolae Negumereanu
1) Mike Mathetha
Total strikes 89

It's good that the share of hardware wallets is growing, but if it's due to the bear market and people moving their money for hodling, doesn't it mean the trend can change when things get better on the market? Moreover, can the change fully be attributed to people living exchanges and opting for hardware wallets or could it be that the adoption of hardware wallets is growing, but not at the expense of exchange users?
Wallets are of course much better for storing coins. But if people do trading, they'll likely still use centralized reputable exchanges for that, and hardware wallets aren't a competitor in this regard at all.

I think it's still possible for the crypto adoption to properly kick in and for a billion of users to be reached. I'd say that less than 8 years isn't enough for that, though, and current world conditions aren't very favourable for larger development of technologies because the economy isn't doing well. 10 to 20 years- yes, sure. 7.5 years - highly unlikely. And then there's the concern others pointed out, regarding the way the number of users is counted (including the number of current users).

I'm pro-Bitcoin, but I don't think it's a fair evaluation of the level of contribution of Bitcoin into the paperless economy. It's an exaggeration to say that it's the forerunner, I believe. After all, there's PayPass, there is Google Pay, and the vast majority of people who don't deal with banknotes usually use something like this, not Bitcoin. It also only takes a few seconds for such a transaction to go through (not literally, of course, as the bank just blocks the funds while they still remain on your account for a while, but in practice you're free to go once this happens), whereas an on-chain Bitcoin transaction will take up to 10 minutes to get confirmed at priority fees.

Before reading the arguments in the thread, I was more tempted to agree than disagree that Satoshi left the project intentionally and was always planning to do so. But it seems that Dave1 and pooya87 are right, and perhaps it was a decision made later on due to certain circumstances. Then again, while the CIA sounds like an argument to stay anonymous, I'm not sure it requires leaving altogether because people and authorities will try to track you down.
It makes perfect sense for a creator of a decentralized currency to leave the project, so that it remains decentralized in terms of further development as well. Whether Satoshi realized it from the start or came to this idea later is something we might never know.