I liked the phrase I read in the most recent John Green's book about the world we live in because I think it's a very accurate description. He talks about how in Mario Kart the question boxes give bigger perks to those who are falling behind in the race and smaller ones to those doing alright, and then he continues:
That's how the world works, IMO, providing benefits to those who are already privileged, and that's why alternative things like diversity quotas appear to balance it out a bit. With Bitcoin, I think the same system holds, but not to the same extent. Let's say two people invested in Bitcoin when it cost $10k and sold at $40k. They both made a 4x profit, but the first person only had $300 to invest, and the second one invested $30k. So now the first person has $1200, which is not a huge improvement, even though it was a great financial decision, and the second person has $120k and can now afford way more stuff than prior to the investment. I'm not saying it's fair that prices and investments work like that because obviously this is just purely mathematical, but in the end it's still more beneficial to those who already have a lot. Not to mention oktana's Elon Musk point, which is also valid, even though price manipulations like that are temporary.

Dollar means stability, at least in this narrow aspect of a stable purchasing power. In a country torn with chaos, stability is something people can be desperate to have, even if it's only about the price and nothing else. So some backlash to mass adoption of Bitcoin in El Salvador was expected. Add to that the fact that El Salvador has the highest murder rate in the world, and it doesn't seem surprising that this backlash results in violence. People there are largely poor and desperate, and a financial change like this might mean that they'll be better off, but can also mean that things will get even worse. Hopefully, though, there will be benefits of Bitcoin adoption, and that can ease the tensions.

Game 1:  13' 1-2 Arsenal
Game 2:  13' 4-0 Manchester City

I agree with others that it doesn't look surprising given the official governmental position on Bitcoin in El Salvador, but it's still a good sign because there was a chance that banks, being natural rivals of cryptocurrencies, would protest these new policies and do their best not to comply with them. In a broken country like El Salvador, this could totally happen, and that could create significant obstacles. But apparently, given how bad the economic situation is, Bitcoin is something many are willing to believe in, and so even banks are taking the risk and welcoming cryptos for a chance of getting more money to operate with.

1) Who will recieve the ball first?  Football Team

2) Will Football Team cover the -3.5 point spread?  Yes

3)  Game total 41?  Under

4) Highest scoring Quarter?  4th

5) Football Team total points?  Odd

6)  Giants total points?  Even

7)  Daniel Jones to throw 1.5 TDs?  Over

8 ) Taylor Heinicke to throw 1.5 TDs?  Under

9) Saquon Barkley to score a TD?  No

10)  Antonio Gibson to score a TD?  No 

Final Score 23-16 Football Team

I'd say that being greedy is buying and selling all the time, trying not to miss a tiny chance to profit even a little bit out of the price dynamics. As for long-term investors, they're ready to see their investments go down temporarily, but they don't quit in these situations. It can be about greed, of course, but it can also be about patience, or about truly believing in a project not only in its financial part, but in terms of ideologically supporting it.
I don't think there's anything wrong in being a trader or a long-term investor, as long as you realize what your priorities are and what you're doing it for.

Do you mean reasons that are being thrown around by different authorities or legit reasons? Restriction of Bitcoin can be explained by protecting investors (due to volatility and many crypto-related scams) or the environment (while not moving to eco-friendly sources of energy and continuing coal mining, of course), it can be simply restricted on the ground that it's not issued by proper authorities and cannot be properly regulated. But the only true reason I see is fear of not being in control. Fiat is relatively easy to control, and Bitcoin is not something you can play with so easily. So restricting or banning Bitcoin ensures that your coins stays in power on a certain territory, that people use banks on a regular basis and don't get any ideas about decentralization. I can understand why people who live in fear of losing their power might restrict Bitcoin this way, but I don't think there are any truly justifiable reasons for banning Bitcoin.

I haven't seen comprehensive data of trading volumes by country yet. There are various websites operating different arrays of data, and they reach different results. Maybe China is higher on the list than Nigeria in some of them, but Nigeria is sometimes somewhere around #2-#3 in others. I guess it's hard to evaluate the real deal properly because people often use international exchanges for their transactions, and may use things like VPN to hide their location. If even US as #1 is disputed, no wonder we can't know if China is higher than Nigeria. In any case, they are both significant, and both currently have policies that aren't very crypto-friendly.

An article is very well-written, and I agree with most things you wrote there and how you explained them. But why are you saying that only Bitcoin is truly accepted as money? Other major coins are sometimes accepted as payment as well, and it's not like Bitcoin is widely accepted as payment either (there are places here and there, but in most situations paying with Bitcoin isn't an option). Here's a list of places where one can pay with Ethereum, for example. It's fine to focus on Bitcoin in the article because it is the most popular cryptocurrency, especially when it comes to being accepted as payment, but altcoins have some potential as being kinds of money as well.

Either you haven't been around for a long time or you haven't paid enough attention because Bitcoin is jumping up and down and 'bleeding hard' occasionally throughout its history. The price hit $1k at the end of 2013, and then was down to $200-300 something in 2015; then it went to $20k at the end of 2017, but dropped as low as $3500 at the beginning of 2019. Finally, the price went to $63k in April 2021, and it's currently struggling at around $45k. Can it go down to $30k? Absolutely? But will it go down to $10k? That seems unlikely. So it makes three steps forward and then two steps back, basically, but that still shows progress overall.

a)  17  b)  2:05

It's been days and the confusing title still wasn't fixed by the op. As for the actual topic, I do think it's only the beginning, but the way it'll go is crucial for further development of events. If El Salvador adopts Bitcoin successfully and gets its economy on the way toward improvement, I'm sure the example will motivate other countries whose economies are in trouble. If the El Salvador experiment gets no results, the impact will be more or less neutral. If it gets worse with Bitcoin than it used to be without it, this will be a major setback. I think there would still appear some countries that recognize Bitcoin as a legal tender eventually, but way slower than if everything goes will with El Salvador.

1. If you're interested in long-term investments, particularities of the market's state shouldn't concern you. You might lose some money at first, but not really if you don't sell the coins. And if we're talking about solid coins and years of waiting, you can end up profiting even if the market crashes hard this month. Many coins on the top of the list by market capitalization are a bit down in comparison to their prices a week ago, so now seems to be an okay time to start.
2. I think we'll see around 60% loss, in contrast to around 80% loss that many altcoins faced the last time. But again, it shouldn't bother you if you're in it for the long run.

It's a nice try to summarize the main points, but I don't agree with some of them. #2 sounds a bit paranoid, as connecting to Wi-Fi networks is not itself a risky move. For one, you can use a VPN and stay safe. Also, you can simply avoid accessing websites that make you susceptible to theft (online banking, blockchain wallet or similar). #4 is kind of obvious and means one's already been scammed, so it's not a prevention technique. And #5 is what one should ideally do, but most ToS are very long and written in a very technical way, so it's pretty much impossible to read it all. But instead, one can make it a rule to check an app's reputation online before downloading it, and at least skimming through the ToS. What's not on the list, but IMO deserves a place, is getting familiarized with new scam schemes and how they work, never paying money to allegedly get more money, avoiding everything that sounds too good.

a)  16  b)  1:56
a)  13  b)  1:35

It's a marketing move IMO. I remember how there was a brief moment when Bitcoin went from something like $55k to $45k, and my relative (who is a Bitcoin skeptic) said he read on Forbes (or a similar reputable source) that Bitcoin crashed massively and if I'm okay (since he knows I own some BTC). What he didn't know was that just a few months ago the price was below $20k, and now, after the allegedly devastating crash, it's $45k, so it's actually still a huge success. This works on people who are already cautious when it comes to Bitcoin, and more generally, news that invoke fear are more engaging than those which are trying to be neutral. Crash sounds more seriously than a decrease of the price, so that's the preferred term for media.

Do we have anyone who's currently in El Salvador and can try these ATMs out? It's interesting to learn about first-hand experience with them (bugs, limits, KYC, fees, other conditions that might apply). Because the government promising to ensure that there won't be costs for people is one thing, and reality can be very different. What's good is that so far it seems that El Salvador is working hard to actually encourage people to use Bitcoin. So it wasn't merely a political statement of support of Bitcoin, it's leading to real actions and shows commitment to adopting Bitcoin in a way no other country adopted it yet.

I agree with the op that having a sell target is important, but if things are looking devastating, sometimes it's the right decision to sell and lose some money than not to sell and lose everything. I don't think a situation like this will happen to Bitcoin, but anything is possible. Also, there's a good chance that there will be no need to sell Bitcoin because there will be an opportunity to buy things and services with it directly, if we're talking about long-term hodling. That being said, there should be an idea on how much purchasing power is enough to start using Bitcoin (or selling for fiat) because if there's no limit, there's a big risk of never getting to use Bitcoin and living one's life as if Bitcoin never cost anything.

Op, good luck with listings, but keep in mind that it might be a lengthy and costly process. I had some experience with negotiations with exchanges, and I've seen costs of tens of thousands of dollars and big detailed forms to fill. So don't go running to Binance or HitBTC immediately. I'd suggest choosing exchanges in the following way: sort the tokens on Coingecko or Coinmarketcap by recently added, and then click on coins and take a look at exchanges where new tokens are listed. If they got listed there, it's probably a realistic option for new tokens.

China is an authoritarian state, and as such it's focused on staying in control. For this purpose, any innovation is potentially negative because any change is a risk that their power and control will be undermined. It's also worth noting that when it comes to economic innovations, China has no incentive for it because it's already the world's second-largest economy, it already performed an economic miracle, and it's predicted to become world's #1 economy in 10 years. As for being communist, they're ideologically communist but economically rather capitalist.