Yes. If the US can invade a country just to arrest their president and persecute him outside to US territory, stopping bitcoin can merely be considered as child's play for them. Even for any country, the government needs to just implement laws and restrictions on using bitcoin and it would make a significant effect on bitcoin's market.

---UPDATE---

My withdrawal got through before the support could contact me. I'm not entirely sure what transpired there but my guess is there has been a congestion (is that even possible?) in a certain stage of my transaction. But what really baffles me is that I have traded and used their service before but this is the first time this has happened. Well as for using this exchange, I'll probably limit myself from using it from now on.

My BTC withdrawal didn't produce any transaction hash related to blockchain after I have done the email confirmation and is still pending until now. I have already contacted their support team and asked me to wait for 48 hours (#42215). Anyone experienced the same problem? 

That is very likely if the developers and miners pursue more and more forks in the future. If that were to happen, they would've created many bitcoin clones that probably offers few to no innovation at all and might confuse new investors in crypto. That being said, the past forks only made btc price rise up further so for now, i think no one can beat bitcoin in terms of market cap yet.

Whats's happening now is a good thing; these events would just justify bitcoin's intended design namely it price only going up through the passage of time. This would be a good appeal to investors and would probably gain more traction than before.

Ethereum is the primary cause for cryptocurrencies popularity and the diversity in the market with its smart contract features. Without it, I doubt bitcoin could make the market more interesting and more promising in terms of investment. Sure, it has some scalability problems but if I were an investor, I'd rather have my tokens be affiliated to a more stable entity rather than waves.

I usually check icobench for the rates of the bounties that I'm trying to join; typically projects with a 3.9 rating below have a low chance of being successful. Then I read the whitepaper of the said project: see if what they're trying to achieve are realistic and has significance not just ideas thrown into blockchain.

Just think of it as a first step of bitcoin regulation in our country which will probably benefit us on the long run. Definitely, there'd be corrupt politicians to take advantage of the events however we should also take note that it would also be a good publicity stunt for cryptocurrencies as a whole.

Your wallet is already compromised, I guess that by the time you have read all post in this thread, your wallet would be empty. Next time though if you are using a pc, make a txt doc and put all infos there that you think would be required by the form you are filling up to avoid this from happening again.

I think majority of tokens and coins won't survive in the future. See this pump in bitcoin we have now?  Altcoin market has been on the red for quite a while now and some coins weren't able to adapt --that will be the case if bitcoin pumped further in the future so imo, tokens are only good for  short term profits .

As I see it,  it's  only a matter of time until the waves market gets congested with various tokens with no value--ethereum got this problem too but i think waves is worse. That being said,  waves still has a good share in the crypto market cap but would be no better than waves.

Why not? ethereum has been a good investment till now and is the platform for the majority of tokens in the market. Indeed, it has it's problem like scalability and has forked a few times but it has survived and the more reason to support it.

Search for the rating of the project on Icobench; four stars is acceptable. Then read their whitepaper, verify if their project makes sense and not just any idea jammed into the blockchain. Next, you ought to join their telegram or slack channel to see if the team is really keeping in touch with the participants and is giving updates about the project.

ICO regulation is good, in fact, it will make the market 'cleaner' as many shitcoins would be filtered out and as a result, many investors would be left with altcoins that will only bring profit to them and the country (in china's and Russia's case). Proof of it being a good thing is bitcoin going up even if the ICO's are completely banned in china.

Not at all! Imagine if you have invested now at 5000$ and after a year and a half, it price went to 8000$ then you have made profit. No one is late yet since the ride is still going up. What I would consider being late though is investing on bitcoin after the mined bitcoins have almost reached 21M

Not all altcoins are dying; some are just momentarily affected by the recent drama on bitcoin and will probably increase in the future. However for those altcoins which are crap from the start, surely they will die.

I have made money from ICO's indirectly by joining their bounty campaigns; it is quite profitable. Although if you ask me if I would be investing in them, I'd say no. The reason is, there are far too many ICO tokens that end up having lower value in exchanges and you end up having less to no profit at all.

I think the reason for that is because of ICO's -- they are too many. Just popping out of nowhere and everyday I see at least 3 new ICO's opening. Because of this, scammers have the chance to deceive many newbie investors that's why in every thing I do nowadays I exert extra caution.

I'm sorry to hear that; it is a very expensive lesson indeed. My hunch is, you have saved passwords  on your browser including your private keys and that's how the hacker got your funds. I suggest you use hardware wallets instead, as is much safer.

Too many upsides and downsides to those respective currencies. To name a few, physical money are readily liquidated while the other is not. It can handle instant and micro transactions. E-money's strength though is to long distance transactions and it has ledgers which record payments. Both complement each others weakness so they can co-exist rather than replacing one or the other.