I feel like this is exactly the reason why the history has been like this and why things aren't going to change. Everyone who gets into these things sees them as a bet, they have chance of winning a prize which is not zero so they keep making the bet even though the house (those who created the garbage) always wins while they lose majority of their bets and they are in a total loss.

So far based on what I've seen ASIC resistant meant you can't use bitcoin SHA256d ASICs to mine that algorithm but creation of an application-specific integrated circuit (ie. ASIC) is very well possible. Even those that tried using more memory with memory expensive algorithms ended up having ASICs.
The only working solution so far seems to have been changing the algorithm every now and then!

P.S. Do we even want an ASIC resistant algorithm? After all ASICs with their huge hashrate are providing the security.

 1. Absolute Hero of Good: satoshi, theymos
 2. Golden Feather: JayJuanGee, gmaxwell
 3. Bitcointalk Ninja: LoyceV, DdmrDdmr
 4. Bitcoin Geek: o_e_l_e_o, ETFbitcoin, Charles-Tim
 5. Event of the Year: El Salvador adopting bitcoin as legal tender
 6. Fail of the Year: boy where do I start lets say price (specifically bubble) predictions from the common $100k to my $440k
 7. Discovery of the Year: BlackHatCoiner, EZ0010
 8. Best SpamBuster: actmyname, Ratimov
 9. Best ScamBuster:
10. Craft Master: DarkStar_
11. Antihero: (they usually don't last long on the forum so I'm gonna choose:) Craig Scammer Wright
12. Miss Bitcointalk: (I don't really know gender of any of the users on bitcointalk)
13. Best Moderator: mprep, Cyrus

P.S. That was very hard and I know I have forgotten a lot of good users but I did my best. 

The miner still has to connect to the pool over the internet and if there is no internet they can't connect to any mining pool regardless of which one they chose. Although there are workarounds, such as using satelite themselves but I don't think any of them had planned ahead, since this was not expected. Keep in mind that the hashrate did drop but only a little which means the whole "crippling bitcoin network" thing is not true.

Bitcoin is not a product that means that bitcoin price is not decided by its production cost.

What you are asking only works for products, like a car for example. They have a production cost and that decides what the finial value of it is. But in case of bitcoin the only deciding factor is the utilities that bitcoin provides and the supply & demand (or adoption) of it.

Even more interesting is that for bitcoin the "production cost" (ie. the mining cost) is decided based on bitcoin's price not the other way around.

So El Salvador starts thinking about dumping US dollar in favor of bitcoin and an American institution in Washington D.C. starts pressuring them not to do it and you think it is has anything to do with them not being ready to adopt bitcoin?!! Quite the opposite, it is all about US not wanting to accept that their currency is losing the position it once had in the world.

It is all about customers and how many of them are going to pay with bitcoin. Imagine a restaurant with regular menu, they don't cook some rare food that nobody would ever order like some weird foreign recipe. If they do (for example buy the ingredients, teach the cooks, etc) they would just add an unnecessary cost that can't be justified in a business.

It is the same with bitcoin payments. Adding the option is good on paper but if only a very small number of people are going to use it (like 0.1% of their total customers) then it is not worth the hassle.
So far the bitcoin adoption is very small and out of that tiny adoption an even smaller percentage are willing to spend their bitcoins. This is why bitcoin payments are still only popular in some niche businesses like where decentralization and privacy are important like among VPN service providers.

History was something like this:
- Bitcoin was created and this invention brought a new technology that was very useful.
- Some developers decided to expand the technology and by changing variables create new cryptocurrencies.
- Bitcoin price kept going up and it attracted a lot of wanna-get-rich-overnight type of people.
- Some of them could code and realized bitcoin is open source so they started copying (forking) bitcoin and creating copycatcoins. These coins took a lot of effort to create and the profit they could make were small since they too had to mine the shitcoin and pump it first then sell it on the market.
- To maximize profit they came up with the idea of premining and that maximized their profit for a short time since people still bought into these shitcoins while ignoring the fact that the dev has a huge supply printed out of thin air in a blinking of an eye and plans on dumping it to  make a ton of money.
- As premine shitcoins started failing they tried hiding the premine, which is where shadow-mine and other methods come in.
- Somewhere in history someone introduced the concept of creating tokens on bitcoin network and a bunch of them were created (referred to as Omni layer). You have heard of at least one called Tether (USDT).
- A developer came alone and took this idea and created a new shitcoin to allow easy creation of tokens, premined the shit out of that shitcoin, started an ICO and make millions overnight.
- Then the idea of creating easy scam coins was expanding and ICOs became very easy for tokens
- As the ICO scam started failing (like all previous scam methods) they started looking for ways to hide the scam so they changed the name to other things including IEO, STO and eventually DeFi and NFT.
-...
- In near future as the token scam is also obsolete, they will come up with a new way to scam people.

You can't "delete" a receiving transaction, not to mention that they are only seen in your history tab and they don't have a delete option anyways. The only thing you can delete is a transaction you are sending (haven't broadcast yet, or it is local) from your history tab or a payment request in the request tab. You can remake both of them again though, since you haven't lost anything.

Be very careful when you do altcoin arbitrage trading, I have had some pretty bad experiences in this field. Usually when there is a big price gap between exchanges in different altcoins it is a bad sign, most of the times one exchange or both are having some serious problems with that coin and you can't transfer it between exchange to complete your trade and get your profit.
Sometimes the order books can be too thin or even fake and you could fail to finish your trade that way and end up bag holding something you don't want to.

Why would it be? Bitcoin is not a product that is only sold by the manufacturer (ie. the miners) so that they can set the price and a limit for it. So it doesn't matter what the cost of mining is, the price can go to any levels, whether higher or lower.
What you have to remember is that price affects the cost of mining, but the cost of mining doesn't affect the price.

Not exactly, because hashrate is not going to spike a lot (like >50%) in a short period and any smaller increase means the change in the average time between blocks is negligible and the difficulty adjustment (every 2016 blocks) takes care of that difference.

You should sell your bitcoins and get out because of a couple of reasons.
First is that you apparently invested more than you could afford to lose, which is the worst thing you can do when it comes to investment specially in something as volatile and new as bitcoin.
Second is that you invested in bitcoin without doing proper research and trying to come up with some sort of understanding on your own so that you don't have to ask such basic question as wanting others predict the unpredictable. In other words you don't invest in bitcoin because you think tomorrow price isn't going to drop, you buy bitcoin because you see the long term potential of it or see the usefulness of the utilities it provides.

We keep coming back to the fact that centralization and decentralization do not mix well with each other. When you try to use centralized exchanges with decentralized bitcoin, that is what you get! A lot of invasive and restrictive measures. That goes with any other centralization, like using a centralized payment processor to send/receive bitcoin.

For example this news does not affect me at all since I'm not using any centralized exchanges and my wallet doesn't come from a centralized company!

It is kind of off-topic but I guess people don't want to change, even if the change is significantly better. It is the same problem we have in bitcoin adoption. I did some search and was very surprised as how low the "open source" adoption is, 2% Linux usage as OS on PC, 2-3% usage of Firefox browser, maybe less than 1% usage of bitcoin, etc. This is while all these alternative open source options are way more superior to their closed source counter parts, not to mention that at this point they are very mature.
I'm very surprised and kind of disappointed to be honest..

If it were really centralized then yeah it would have been a bad sign but bitcoin hashrate hasn't been centralized ever. This is just the same 9 year old FUD but the word "China" is being replaced by the word "Kazakhstan". Funny thing is that mining is still ongoing in China despite what the media says and Chinese miners who migrated went to many different locations not just Kazakhstan or even US despite what the media keeps telling us.

@nc50lc is right, the things you explain with certainty like importing the same exact key into different software and getting different addresses is not something that can happen under normal circumstances. One of the reasons why I initially asked you whether you had verified the Electrum file was this, you can't just get a different address from the same key if the software is legit.

You could try reddit or SE.

It is not that unlikely to make a simple mistake while importing those keys one by one. You may have even made the mistake of pasting an address that you had copied for some other reason into your import window which is why you ended up with a watch only wallet in first place. It definitely doesn't happen while you are syncing.

You do realize that $3.14 price change is a tiny 0.008% change right?

Does it matter though? The point here is that bitcoin, a as a payment system, is handling this much transfer of value. Whether it is from one pocket to another or it is from one person to another doesn't change that bitcoin is handling all those transactions.
The point you are making is important when we are talking about adoption.

Well, if we are talking about idiots then all it takes is a couple of days of stock market crashing and bitcoin price rising even a little for the sheeple who believed the "scam" story to start believing the "moon" story and jump on board.
In this scenario we are talking about a major crash not a small 5% drop. Maybe a big recession like 2008 that led to bitcoin creation. After all bitcoin went up 2000% during the pandemic when economy was shit.

I disagree, not just because there has never been any relationship between the markets in the past 13 years but also because when US markets tank people will start pulling their money out of US markets but they won't put that money under their mattress, instead they will look for an alternative place to put it and bitcoin is an excellent option.
In other words it is a strong possibility that we see a big bitcoin bull run when the US markets tank.