In theory you could create anyone-can-spend transaction, but if you are referring to standard Bitcoin transactions your question wouldn't make any sense.

Of course, you can't derive a private key from anything, it is called private for a reason.

Hash of every transaction on the Bitcoin blockchain is publicly known to everyone in the Bitcoin network and you can see them all with any block explorer.
So this is in no way a secret information. It is just unique for every transaction so you could identify a transaction with it, but nothing else.

Yeah, when it comes to tracking data of non-users, Google takes the trophy on that one easily.
Almost every website nowadays have a Google script tracking it's visitors across the Internet.

Facebook opens up quite the problems for it's users, as people share a lot of very personal information there.
Google however is a main problem for the privacy of the Internet in general.
Sites that they don't own have their scripts in them, so they are really strong in that business.

Yeah, I concentrated on the US to much in my post, but financial crisis was felt all across the World to some extent as US has quite an impact on economy.
Countries that didn't have a lot to do with US suffered less, but this was called a Global financial crisis for a reason, so you are correct.

I don't agree. Valuating people is subjective and everyone has their own characteristics that they value.
You can't judge a fish by it's ability to climb a tree.
If those people lived long enough to survive and reproduce for millions of years, there must be something they are pretty good at, even if that something is just getting along with other people well.

It takes a lot of effort and skill, for example, to do something as a team and explain your views to others.
Some people are just more naturally gifted at it than others. They might have a good temperament and patience for example.

When it comes to ethics, artificial intelligence is just intelligence, not a person with rights and responsibilities.
It's owner is the person in which custody these machines live in and they should be fully responsible for actions of their machines.
Even if they act human, they are just machines owned by someone and they should be treated as such.

I think I heard that recommendations on YouTube use machine learning, so it could literally be anything that program found as a good reason to start recommending it. Probably the fact that it is a bit more than 10 minutes long (breaking point where they allow a creator to put more ads on the video) and has no ads, as far as I can see, has something to do with it, but who knows.

As someone once mentioned, not even YouTube programmers know the algorithm on how YouTube recommends videos, since it is AI and is always changing.
I mean I never got this video recommended to me and I watch YouTube a lot.
I delete my cookies all the time and websites are pretty much all connected by now through Google's javascript code everyone is adding to their sites.
So it could very well be connected to something else you did on some other website and probably these people too, so AI thought you might like that by some random algorithm that seems to be working for now trough a process similar to natural selection.

TLDR; Don't worry about it.

Zvuci kao plan za zazaljenje
Ako smatras da ce kad tad da Bitkoinu skoci cena onda ti je rizicno da ga prodajes.

I think you are just talking about US here dude.
This has nothing to do with the rest of the World.

Rest of the World goes through many other things. Some go through war. Some go through an economic boom.

Who is to blame for you situation? I don't know, probably your government and your banks.
You have to understand that after financial crisis of 2007 it is harder to get a loan for a house and you are still paying for those bank bailouts to this day with inflation they like to call quantitative easing.

Financial crisis of 2007 started in the US, so the effect of it is felt in US the most.
It is no coincidence Bitcoin was born at that time. This is why you can find references of bank bailouts in the first Bitcoin block.

Why retire?
You can rest when you are dead.
Life is for living, not for sitting on your couch doing nothing.

If your job is tiring you, then you need to find another job.
If you like what you do, you should never retire, do it less or do it more, but why would you retire?

Sta ima novo inace narode?
Dobre cene za investicije ako mene pitate.

Nesto se dosta utisalo sve u zadnje vreme oko Bitkoina. Ne samo ovde, nego generalno.
Iskreno ovako mi se i malo vise svidja, ali znam da niti ce da traje, niti bi trebalo da potraje

86 is pretty good in my opinion. My node gets around 30, I think, probably due to low network bandwidth.

It is always visible on the bitnodes.earn.com when I check.
You can enable email notifications to tell you when it is down, if you want.

As for adding them directly, I don't know. It is probably unnecessary. You might even be slowing them down or limiting them in some way by doing so.

Ironicno je sto nude prevod kao uslugu, a koriste Google translate.

I think you are confusing saving money and just straight up not be willing to spend any bitcoins you get your hands on.
There is absolutely no problem created by people saving their bitcoins whatsoever. It is just a more useful currency if people use it as well.

You can HODL all the bitcoins that you can afford, but gradually switch from using fiat in your everyday life to Bitcoin.
Savings and usage of the platform are not strictly related.

Saving bitcoins or any other currency doesn't really affect it in any negative way, it can only increase the price.
It is lack of use that could hurt it and if saving comes at the expense of that, then yes, but it really doesn't have to do anything with it.

This doesn't mean that you need to spend more bitcoins, this is a stupid idea.
This just means that you need to move your use of fiat to Bitcoin. that is all.

No. Passphrases are used to encrypt wallets. You will still need a wallet that has private keys written inside it.

Unless you have seed words for your wallet, you will need your wallet file to be able to decrypt it and use your coins.

Every religion is about love, tolerance and forgiveness in my opinion.
No matter what you believe in, hatred shouldn't be part of your life and you shouldn't hurt anyone.

I am an atheist myself, but I think there is good in every religion, that should be emphasized as main point of your creator.
After all, parents generally care more that their children are good to each other more than anything, as parent loves all of his children equal.
It makes little sense that your creator would send you after one of his other children. You are all equal.

Why not both?

You can HODL and use a portion of your bitcoins.

I use mine regularly to pay for stuff since it is easier and safer than opening a bank account.
I also save everything I don't need to spend.

You shouldn't be forced to spend your bitcoins, saving is absolutely fine and normal and it doesn't hurt Bitcoin in any way.
It helps it in a way that you don't let your bitcoins flow into the pockets of companies for no good reason.
HODL whenever you can mate. Good luck!

Maybe you should try a different wallet then, like Electrum. Electrum is open source and quite popular.

If there is a way in your wallet to show you your private keys or some seed words, that might be enough for you to transfer your wallet to Electrum.

If transactions that were sending you bitcoins got confirmed then you should be able to use your bitcoins, I don't see what is the problem here.

Fighting spam is exactly what PoW was invented for, it was used for this first and then Bitcoin came later, inspired by it.
You should check out Hashcash, this was a protocol proposed to help fight email spam, but the industry chose centralized solutions instead.
Without it, Bitcoin would have never existed.

But I see that you are proposing a single mining system where you get rewards in Bitcoin for your anti-spam efforts.
This is a bad idea in my opinion, as giving the attacker a way to profit from his work in another system gives him a reason not to care on how much spam he sends, since he will return a profit on them through mining.

I have been think about this a lot when I was first introduced to Bitcoin and for now I came to a conclusion that PoW in Bitcoin mining shouldn't be reused for anything else, as it decreases the security of both systems, for the sake of efficiency.

PoW is by nature "wasteful", it has to be.  If it has any other purpose, it means it is not proving that you put in the work for this block, email, etc.
But that you simply used work from some other system as a lie that you actually put in work in this new system.

Mining with some special restrictions, as you provided, does bring benefits to security, but it provides more problems in mining, since you can't mine in pools any longer. Everything has it's price.

Using an independent PoW system would provide the actual proof that you put in the work for that exact message.
Using a different hashing algorithm is also very useful, so miners can't reuse their ASIC rigs to create a lot of spam in short period of time.
Same as with altcoins.

So imagine every such message protocol as a cryptocurrency itself where you need to think of it's security in the same way.

I think everyone regrets not buying more bitcoins. There really isn't a reason why you wouldn't.

I think you outline most arguments in your OP and address them.
It is a difficult question society needs to ask itself.

I don't think that death penalty acts as an efficient deterrent. Spending 30 or 40 years in jail, or even a life sentence, seems like a very good motivation to not commit a crime. I don't think that simply by adding more punishment we get better efficiency and I think statistics back this up.

Losing a person in our society, even if it is a criminal, still impacts us negatively. We benefit from every mind that is alive today, if for nothing else, to tell their story.

There is one type of situation where I am thinking that death penalty might be applicable and that is if a person in question really is so dangerous and competent to hurt others even if sent to high security prison. These situations are so rare however, so I don't think that this makes any significant impact on the decision.