If I were FBI, I wouldn't throw away an old bitcointalk account anyway. Not that it means it's really the feds, eh.

Thanks for the code. I'm ordering a card very soon. Before I do, I have a question:

Can I get an unverified card first, with a dummy name, and later verify the same card with my real name?

Putting my money where my mouth is. I decided to sell too. $800 was too inviting. It's already down to $695 though... 
The procedure is a bit inconvenient. I split the coins and now I sent a couple transactions to Kraken. They want 20 (yes, TWENTY) confirmations on the BCH before you can trade. Besides, Kraken is really acting like it's swimming in molasses. Someone here suggested it's the bad BCH guys trying to slow down the selloff.

Whatever it is, I'm afraid it will be down to $300 by that time. Hm, maybe I can wait it out and hope for another BCH pump/BTC dump by Ver&co.

That miner probably co-owns it! 

Neatly stated! This is what I meant in my previous post where I mentioned fresh money going to enter the system. That money isn't going to be Ver&co.

Basically agreed, but it's not a 0/1 thing. There are varying degrees civilization for different aspects of civilization.

I don't think panic about BCH is justified. My idea is that a few factors are at work.

Some bad guys are rehearsing the big pump&dump that will take place with the 2x fork.

The miners are rehearsing touch&go. It is mildly profitable at the moment, while BCH price is being kept high.

I think this situation can't go on much longer. BCH doesn't have hodler culture. My guess is most holders of BCH are just people that got a windfall and are either being lazy, prudent, greedy or all of the above. If I could sell my BCH at 0.50 BTC, without the hassle of swiping all my addresses first, with a reliable BCH client happy to do the splitting job for me, my finger would be on the sell trigger.

Putting real fiat or - god forbid! - BTC into BCH? No way. New money's coming into BTC already, more is due soon. I don't think they'll be eager to flood BCH with fresh money.

Wait and see is just the course of least resistance for me.

I do too, but I think it would be nicer to wait for possible November turbolence before converting it all into BTC.

I sold.
My house so I can get moar cheep corn!!
 

Hoping for 3500, as I just got hold on some extra fiat that could be put to good use!

Guitar?

Gdax prices still way above the rest. What do you think the matter is?

Now, that's an articulated argument!  
I'm cutting stuff to avoid walls of text.

I can partially confirm your anecdotal reports. A good friend of mine, Englishman, married and living in southern EU, didn't vote because of logistics. That would have been Stay. His family back in England - constructors and engineers - voted Leave. They match your general descriptions. However, they are already regretting it.

The trade bloc has pros and cons. I agree there's a significant admission price, but there's the advantage of running financial (and fintech!) services from London without additional costs. There's the advantage of selling UK-produced goods without trade barriers. It's a tradeoff, as usual. I happen to think the tradeoff would have a positive balance for the average UK guy had they Stay-ed.

The EU is indeed full of problems. Some of these problems will be hard to solve, or won't be solved at all. But there is good and bad in the EU. I'm trying to weigh one against the other.

Don't know about Norway, but Germany took swift advantage of the EU when the Union wasn't so fiscally restrained. They snatched the opportunity to fix systemically large banks and basically spread the bill to the whole EU. It's only after this (legitimate given the rules at the time) financial laundry that they started to cry for rigorous monetary policies. Personally, I would welcome some more rigour. I think the 2% target on "inflation" (actually only on the CPI, which is not a true representation of inflation) is a scam - against fixed income workers at first, and against everybody else on the long run.


Maybe because you care?  

On the contrary, I think we had a good and civil discussion. It can't be bad.

I want to move to a place like that as soon as we get closer to the moon!
I've got a friend who built a kind of residential community in Jamaica, she says it's almost like this - at least in the community village. I actually doubt it's all honey roses, though. Maybe I should ask her for more details.

No need to be sorry for disagreeing.
Some more elaborated arguing wouldn't hurt, though.

I must be a fool, then.

People who have a clue about the actual consequences, I'd say.

I can't speak for K~Ehleyr, but I have been following the Brexit matter closely since the debate started. The urban people, the educated, the young, overwhelmingly voted "Remain". So did some geographical/economical minorities (notably Scotland). The bulk of "Leave" voters were working class folk, afraid because they're losing their jobs to Polish plumbers. They have been lied to, their fears exploited cynically. Now these people see that the foreign plumber isn't going away anyway, but the City workers who used to be their customers at lunchtime or when their expensive shirts needed washing are going away if the government isn't able to negotiate merciful terms. And things look like the they won't be able to.

This is not about centralization/decentralization IMO. It's about an open market or a closed market. It's much harder to produce (or keep) wealth in the latter. Some of the uneducated are beginning to realize what happened above their heads, and they aren't going to be happy about that.

In other words, the forkers want to take control of the rules but keep the name (and value - that is, users, and market cap) of something that was built without them, in a different way, with different expectations: namely, that no single entity of trust of a few entities could take control.

The problem I have with this is that the present coven has only one objective in mind: the maximization of short-term miner profit. If this is good for the hodlers, the casual users, or other investors, is immaterial in their agenda.

An example: in due time, they could figure out that a hard cap on inflation (the "21 million" ceiling) isn't really necessary to maximize their SHORT TERM profit. They can sell the block reward before the inflation is "felt" elsewhere, or before it is fully felt anyway. Which means an increase in profit: the full reward, or the part of it that hasn't yet been discounted by the market as inflation.

Another example: censoring or reversing transactions that they don't like. When mining is really centralized, and miners make the rules, that's entirely possible. Therefore, by Murphy's Law, it will happen sooner or later. You want to send btc to some Chinese colleague of Assange's or whatever? You can't. You want to order a 1M$ mining rig from that rival of mine? Sorry, the transaction will never make it to one of my blocks.

I guess I could figure out better examples, but I hope you get the point. That would be the end of bitcoin as we know it.

Amen.

I don't think it's so bad as it looks on paper. SegWit2x is who SegWit2x does. What's the use of staying connected with incompatible nodes that propagate blocks of the wrong size and might shield you from useful, compatible peers? The same could be said on either side - normal nodes and SegWit2x nodes.

I haven't yet. Waiting for my crystal ball to get back repaired from the factory. It never worked as advertised.

However, I have read through how LN works technically. You can't open a channel that's not backed up by hard cash (btc). No promissory notes or other IOUs. You got the btc, you can open the channel - minnow or whale makes no difference. As for future natural evolution, only time will tell. Do you have a forecast to offer?