Pm sent.

People overestimate "whales". I've known a few people who have lost tens of thousands of dollars trading altcoins.

I distinctely remember a previous Darkcoin "whale" selling 100 btc worth of DRK at .0099 btc....It was bought in one shot and the price jumped to .0245 btc a few days later(Or to clarify, before Bitifinex added DRK to their exchange, but they announced it before)

Some whales are horrendously stupid. So please, don't put them all on some high pedestal.

No. I'm saying that it's best to have a "main" site to get all your updates/wallets/etc about Bitcoin.

Did you not see the blockchain.info scam that was happening on google a while ago, where a phishing site was impersonating blockchain? Yea, and there are tons of other scam sites that pretend to be web wallets, etc etc.

All I'm saying is that having bitcoin.org as the "main" site for Bitcoin, is good, especially for newbies, or else they'll all fall into the traps of the scammers.

On their site as you shown in op, https://bitcoin.org/en/about-us. They say, "Bitcoin.org is not an official website. "

I don't think, " "Official site offering documentation, forums and the open source client software which permits to send and receive bitcoins."  - Site Description showing up on Google.", is them saying they own Bitcoin, but rather that Bitcoin.org is the main site representing bitcoin and/or the one that's safe to download the bitcoin wallets and such. That's helpful since there is a ton of scams going on with Bitcoin, remember that fake blockchain.info phishing site a while back?

btc-e, hands down is the worst.

I look at it slightly differently. I view distribution as bad in cases like NXT, where all the coins were given to extremely few people and that of course would make it difficult to obtain a diverse distribution due to most of the coins being in relatively few hands. When it comes to good distribution, it's sort of a dilemma. Since  cryptocurrencies aren't as well known and used like we would want them to be, even the best of distributions wouldn't matter as much compared to a coin that has had decent distribution. Unless most of the world adopts a coin as a reserve currency of sorts, then distribution will always be criticized/can't be perfect. My thoughts are that it's the things built around a coin that matters. So payment gateways that allow XMR to be accepted to buy goods imo(which in itself, if the companies convert to fiat, would distribute the currency further), is what matters more than any type of distribution(as long as the distribution itself is decent)

You've been wrong on every single point you've made.

Homophobic means - irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals. Also some(there are many species of animals that do not, especially when they haven't encountered humans often i.e animals in exclusive parts of the world) animals fearing man is a learnt behavior, animals do not automatically fear humans, Discovery Channel and studies done on animals(Bears for ex.) should clarify this for you.

You meeting one homosexual or bisexual person who's been involved with abuse by their partner doesn't justify you claiming that all of them are violent. In fact, it's quite the opposite. Around 1 in 5 women in the Unites States report that they have been sexually assaulted. 1 in 5. So based upon that evidence, does that give me the right to say that all men are violent ? No, so then you definitely cannot claim that all homosexual men are violent given your 1 encounter.

Morality is innate. Meaning it's not learnt usually, it's basically an aversion to causing pain, physical or mental to another being. Of course this is just a general view, many different cultures have their own view on what's right and wrong, etc.

 "If males could reproduce having sex with other males, or females with females, I would have to agree that scientifically homosexuality is normal and that anyone that disagrees with this is being brainwashed to believe that it is wrong, but that isn't the case.  Sure, there is deviance from the norm, but it is deviant."

What's been shown, especially in the case of epi-marks, is that the chance of a male becoming homosexual increases as the mother has more kids. So if a mother has had 8 male children, the chance of the 9th one being gay is far higher than of the 1st one being gay. This could be a way to slow down/control population growth. It technically is a deviant from the norm, but it is still natural, kind of like if most people in one town had brown hair, and someone was born with yellow hair, that doesn't make them crazy, they just have a different hair color than most people in the town. Female sexuality however, is much more complicated presumably according to Dr Meredith Chivers work. Women have the capacity to be attracted to things that are sensual. So unlike males, who tend to be a bit rigid in their arousal patterns(could be due to cultural influences), women can be aroused by things that are overall "appealing" such as sexual intercourse if even between animals. They were even aroused by bonobo apes mating: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/25/magazine/25desire-t.html?pagewanted=1&_r=3&sq=bonobos%20sex%20study%20blood%20flow&st=cse&scp=1. I know some people reading this will think, "Well if they're attracted to sensual things, then why are most of them hetero-romantic/heterosexual?(predominantly attracted to males sexually and romantically)". Well, evolution gave males features that would tip the scale in favor of them as being the foremost sexual/romantic partners of women, such as women being aroused by the mere pheromones a male produces, along with the overall structure of the male body, such as strong broad shoulders, tall, etc(especially during menstruation), and many more.

So in actuality, homosexuality is not something unnatural, and not something to be scared of if you're heterosexual and think," Oh the world is going to end because everyone will "turn" gay". That's not the case, as the majority of women and men are predominantly heterosexual with both sexes having specific attributes that appeal to the other, like two pieces to the puzzle. I go by the quote that, " Men drive the world, Women direct it", in the sense that men are usually more headstrong, while women are usually more "careful" so to speak(search up brain imaging of men vs women). Without men, the world will become stagnant and there would be no progression, without women the world will be less peaceful overall.

If you're talking about timeframes, 1billion years>1million years>100,000years>present day, etc. Yes, I can safely say that it's proven that the earth is a lot older than the 6,000 or so years as originally thought according to the Genesis chapter of the Old Testament(Which is also regarded by some scholars are symbolic and not to be taken literally).

You seem to take every portion of your religious text(Quran, Torah, Bible), literally. Try thinking that some passages in those holy books are not to be taken literally. I must say, that I wholeheartedly agree with only 1 section of the bible, which is the New Testament. While I don't really believe in the religious part, I believe in Christ's teachings, they are things that can apply to any religions and all peoples; an overall message of love.

. Increased government regulation and focus on crypto that drives a boom in anon.

There's also the opposite. Increasing amount of tools to deduce Bitcoin's pseudo anonymity(Blockchain tracking/analysis programs). In the not too distant future, tools like that will be made public or for a price, and they will have great effects(negatively) on Bitcoin's privacy.

1) Become accepted in illegal(frowned upon, but pretty much necessary at the beginning) darknet markets, along with other (legal) websites i.e casinos, lotteries, which is what also happened to Bitcoin in it's beginnings.

2) Gain exposure & followers, based upon marketing the currency towards groups most likely to use it(Private institutions/companies, individuals seeking privacy, websites, etc)

3) Acceptance as a reliable, decentralized, private, way of transfering wealth.

4) Continue from there

I believe Monero could improve upon not just anonymity, but security, ways to make holding the coins on your computer relatively safe, even when faced with threats such as hacking and the like. I believe that lack of security is what stops many, many people from using cryptocurrencies(Bitcoin). If Monero could penetrate that area in terms of security, then it may even be more favorable to use than Bitcoin.

Ok thank you. Why didn't you just put the public key in the OP in the first place, putting the private key there when this was supposed to be a competition raised some alarms.

I edited my post, They could import, just don't do it to a wallet with bitcoins in them, as it's extremely odd they you present a challenge to find out your favorite mobile platform, yet present us with a private key instead of a public key....

And according to here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Private_key, "In contrast, bitcoind provides a facility to import a private key without creating a sweep transaction. This is considered very dangerous, and not intended to be used even by power users or experts except in very specific cases. Bitcoins can be easily stolen at any time, from a wallet which has imported an untrusted or otherwise insecure private key - this can include private keys generated offline and never seen by someone else."

That's an odd response from you, "Coins still there, what have times become, I can't even bribe people anymore... #sad-day #too-old #yobo"

I(lately) just realize that OP has presented us with his private key instead of public key, which is extremely odd :

I advise NO ONE to import this private key to their bitcoin wallet if you have bitcoins in it(a empty one is fine). OP's private key is likely insecure and will STEAL your bitcoins.

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Private_key.

Bribe Response: Your favorite platform is Android.

This^

Yea it is still a bitcoin forum, and bitcoin led to the creation of altcoins. If the altcoin section were taken off, I believe this forum would lose a lot of users/eventually die.

Ah, some people(Armis) will forever dwell in their ignorance. Stupidity surely is a hard thing to change.

Sir, if you take that route, comparing religious states to mostly non-religious states, the non-religious will win.

America, btw, is still mostly Christian, so you're statement, " given the state of the USA (homo/marijuana/education/war/prison/removal of religious expression from much of American life)" is horrendously wrong.

Homosexuality, or those(men) that are predominantly homosexual(I agree with Kinsey on the statement that mostly everyone has some degree of bisexuality), it is caused by factors beyond their control, such as hormonal changes within the womb, as well as genetics(epi-marks), based upon recent findings. With women, it's more diverse in the sense that even self identified lesbians are aroused by scenes depicting men according to a recent study done by the sexologist, Meredith Chivers. For the most part, that plays into the theory that women are more sexualiy fluid than men(have greater degrees of bisexuality). Again, those things are out of their control, and what gives you the right to deny them love?

Sorry, just wanted to explain a bit to on sexuality........

To the part about non-religious countries standard of living vs religious countries. The less strict religious democratic countries will always win(since the biggest exclusively non-religious countries are communist and would make no sense to compare them).

Compare India's extreme sexist view towards women, along with their caste system, leads to an overall depressive state of affairs. Have you not seen the countless rape and murder committed in India by men taking advantage of women because they are physically stronger and believe themselves to be more entitled? Have you not seen the deprived state of being some people live in according to India's caste system i.e Untouchables? India's entire backwards and twisted manner of being is due to it's strict religious outlook. Take that away and you'll get a much freer and overall less repressive state.

The United States may have it's problems, but thankfully over the years, it's people have begun to become more acceptable of what was previously viewed as wrong or backwards i.e (true)homosexuality. That's a luxury to have considering that many(strict,religious) countries around the world are repressing it's citizens in the sake of their religion.

Religion has been used to unify people and provide for them a moral code to live by. But as the times are changing, so is our "need" for religion. Don't let your religion/religious beliefs cloud your judgement(as it does to so many people). Remember that as the centuries have passed, mis-translations of text may have occurred along with outright lies, so it's my belief that one should know when to go by their religion's beliefs, but have their own individual judgement in matters as well.

I personally don't believe in any one religion as being the right one since they all have long histories of horrible atrocities committed in their name as well as overall, sometimes, very inhumane rules(concerning the laws of moses in the old testament, a lot of which were absolutely horrible) . I believe in "something", like a nagging thought on the back of my mind, or a cushion of air that I don't know exists, but I partly believe it does...if that makes any sense at all..

Lmao, why is the text yellow.

I know for sure he paid them. They both retweeted the post that was originally made by OP(First.Bitcoins) himself. Just marketing. Same as people paying for articles on websites etc