I do not believe that Russia will ever legitimize the crypto currency on conditions that are acceptable for its existence. If even recently the Telegram network was banned for use, seeing it as a threat of terror, but in fact, because this social network refused to provide intelligence services with information about the ciphered data of its participants, it is possible to imagine what prohibitions will accompany the possible permission to circulation of crypto currency. Crypto currency is also not subject to complete control by the secret services. Most likely, what will be allowed will be unacceptable for citizens. In this case, it is simply interesting whether the citizens will defend their rights in this case and how far the parties can go to defend their point of view.

The decision to retain or sell received tokens for a significant amount is most likely to be accepted not depending on this amount, but on the prospects of these tokens. If after a while these tokens can rise in price, then their sale does not make sense. You will lose significant income. At the same time, if you are not sure that tokens will grow in value, then they should be sold regardless of the amount. Depending on the specific circumstances, it is possible to do this in parts, keeping track of the further price movement of this token.

It's good that people are trying to defend their constitutional rights, in particular, the right to use crypto currency. Of course, almost everything depends on the specific laws in India. In my country, the Civil Code provides for the right to make any transactions that are not directly prohibited by law. That is, if there is no direct prohibition to use the crypto currency, and it is the law, and not another by-law, we have the right to make any transactions in the crypto currency and no bank can prohibit it. Therefore, it is interesting what decision will be made on this lawsuit.

Banknotes, face value of 0.01 and 0.05 bitcoins, this is something new. However, so far much in their release and use is unclear. These banknotes, it turns out, have signs of ordinary money, crypto-currencies, bills. With this approach, it is possible to create crypto-currency banks and they will be able to provide various services in crypto currency using such banknotes. In this regard, we say that we are only at the beginning of the development of the crypto currency. There are many more surprises ahead of us.

As you correctly pointed out, internal crypto-currency has been created in the telegram, that is, as a result of the ICO, tokens have been created, which will practically be used only for telegram and have virtually no relation to bitcoin. Therefore, these tokens can not affect bitcoin in any way, and therefore it will not be able to dislodge bitcoin or cause it any other troubles in any way.

Gold and bitcoin are very poorly compared to each other. Now it's very profitable to make money in bitcoin, but it's best to partially withdraw the profit and convert it into either ordinary currency or gold.
 We can not be sure that bitcoin will grow in price for a long time, and not only grow, we also can not be sure that bitcoin will not fall to its original value in the near future. As for gold, we can be sure that it will always be valuable. This is one of the most significant and undeniable advantages of gold.

Imagine what will happen if bitcoin is recognized as the main currency, rather difficult. I can not even imagine how commercial structures will report to the tax service if the price of bitcoin is constantly changing. The binding to stable normal currencies will have to be done in any case. However, it will be very difficult to prove the income and expenses. The planning of the country's economy in general and the subsequent implementation of the budget will be very difficult, if at all possible. I would not want to participate in such an experiment.

Yes, but why require identification data and copies of documents from signatory campaign participants? We are not investors of the ICO project. I think this is just arbitrariness on the part of the ICO team. I have not seen anywhere so that any of them justified their demand to pass the KYC check by the participants of the campaign of generosity. The only logical conclusion here is that the ICO campaign requires bounty hunters to undergo such a check after the end of the ICO only with the aim of not paying the earned tokens.

I fully agree with the fact that now the investment should be transferred to altcoyins, and it is to prospective tokens with low market value. Perhaps the bitcoin time is already passing. Of course, it will grow the price, even very significantly. However, its present value is already very large. I do not believe in the price of a bitcoin of hundreds of thousands of dollars. The alarmists will not let him rise too high. Constantly there will be different unforeseen situations and bitcoin will fall in price. Therefore, the most realistic for profit is the altcoins, although a certain percentage of their investments should still be kept in bitcoin.

After soon the states finish the process of legalization of the crypto currency and, at the same time, its taxation will be introduced, most exchanges and exchangers will have to apply the conditions for identifying their customers and then the anonymity of bitcoin for law enforcement agencies will cease to exist. Even taking into account the planned improvements in bitcoin, including increasing the level of its confidentiality, it still does not work.

Such a tactic of full retention of the token received as a result of participation in the campaign does not always justify itself. Only promising tokens deserve long-term retention. However, many received tokens not only do not increase in value over time, but often fall, and some - in general forever.

Of course, the named coins will always grow in value and therefore their retention is a good way to have a good profit in the future. However, the situation with tokens is different. Here the holding is not always appropriate, and if it is applied, it is basically up to a certain time, depending on the prospects of the projects. Therefore, the question with tokens is much more complicated and is solved in each case in its own way.

While I see that both bitcoin and cash have their advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, you need to be able to use both cash and bitcoin. Situations in life are very different. Bitcoin is not everywhere possible to pay. This situation will continue for a very long time, because this process is long.

The fact that all the Crypto currency is falling in price after bitcoin, I do not see anything good. And this is not the dignity of bitcoin. If, because of this, the crypto currency can not outrun the bitcoin in the price, it simply means that in fact, we do not yet have any crypto-currency market. Everything has a link to bitcoin. Therefore, what can be discussed if the price of altcoins does not depend on the functionality of a coin or a token, and bitcoin, which has a price of thousands and tens of thousands of times more compared to altcoyines, can not even fulfill its basic function of payment medium normally?

In Sweden, a fairly high standard of living, so there may well be without cash. And then, I doubt that everyone will be able to give up ordinary money there. Also, 20-30 percent of the world's population can go to non-cash settlements and crypto-currencies. However, I do not think that they are ready for this in the rest of the territory.

It is because of the panic that in most cases the crypto currency is falling. This happened earlier and will happen in the future, because some people permanently join the crypto currency, and some of it goes away. As far as uncertain numbers of individuals are concerned, we can not influence this process in any way.

With this situation, you just have to accept it. We can not change anything in this situation. There will always be a lot of people who, without understanding the essence of incoming news, will sow panic and, at the slightest risk for bitcoin or other crypto currency, immediately sell them. It has always been and it always will be. Such people, because they will suffer losses, will themselves leave the world of crypto-currency and, thus, the crypto-currency market will get rid of them. This is a normal and normal process.

Restore access to previously lost bitcoins by selecting their secret keys will soon be in connection with the advent of quantum computers that will be able to select a cipher for such keys in a very short time. Apparently, the crypto currency will have to be protected from such computers by moving to a new level of safe operation. The same bitcoins, which will remain encrypted in the block-chain block chain in the same form, can be considered lost and re-used.

The statistics have already appeared that bitcoin is used for illegal or criminal purposes somewhere around ten percent. Bitcoin is simply inconvenient for this. For money laundering and for other crimes, more confidential coins, such as monero, are used. Therefore, the conversation about the use of bitcoin for money laundering or for committing other crimes has no basis. Who says this, either does not own the situation, or deliberately spreads false information about Bitcoin.

The volatility of bitcoin, of course, greatly affects its legalization by various states. States do not want to have a means of payment of high cost, the price of which will be constantly and significantly changed. It also discourages organizations that are going to use bitcoin as a means of payment, and even citizens. I think that bitcoin will have high volatility always. Decentralized nature and lack of security will always make bitcoin not stable.