a FIAT market crash(bear) is a btc market uptick(bull)
a FIAT market crash is indeed impending. it surrounds the pensions market sector of FIAT

there are two things
1)
during the 2008 crisis that affected many businesses. many whispers that businesses had emptied, dipped into their pension trusts of their employees to keep the business afloat, this means that in a few years/decades when its time for larger amounts of employees to retire, the pot of cash left for divvy out to retired employees is empty/dry
2)
many new pension schemes since the 1980's have made absurd promises to people which are just not even feasible to fulfil.('locks' guarantee end of career salary from pension age to life expectancy age)

imagine that at 25yo in 1980 you decided to start saving for retirement, you earned $50k a year in 1980 and salary inflated to $158k by 2020 and were paying in 15% pension for them 40 years ($565k)matched by employer(total $1.3m+inflation=$1.95m)

but on your 65th birthday you realise that although 1980's estimates had it that life expectancy was 76, meaning expecting an average of 11 years of life and expecting about an average of $158k income a year.. (sounded great in 1980 when you were only earning $50k) as the pension fund can afford the $1.73m payout of the $1.95m accumulated.

but now people live until 85years meaning 20 years of retirement, meaning $3.16m lump. but pension fund only accumulated $1.95m(bad news.. someones gonna lose or have promise broken)

what then happens is because the lock promises that you get end-of-career salary from retirement age till life expectancy age (65-85) many people then take out this $158k x 20($3.16m) as a lump sum. instead of as a regular income.
thus a pension company deficit of $1.22m per pensioner that does this.

leading to the pension fund drying up and unable to pay out to other people reaching pension age later on.
.......
this is why you are now seeing more people working passed their retirement age, with promises if they keep working and paying in, then they can get regular income pension. or they take the large single lump sum, knowing they wont get salary matching regular income.

pension funds promise the 'regular income' group things under the hope that those who continue working have bad health and reduce hours(get less salary) so their 'lock' amount when they do finally retire is less then official retirement age 'lock' they should have started claiming...

also they hope they can get old people to work themselves to death to never need to pay out.
but with good healthcare, even that evil pension fund hope wont transition to break even the pension fund loses

so yea. expect a pension funds implosion, once the pension funds run dry.
(first signs are a increase of % of people claiming lump sums instead of regular income/working for extra years)
its why you see government adverts trying to push more people into starting their pension plans at earlier ages, its become a ponzi to try keeping pension funds afloat

plagiarism is usually about content of value, significant meaning, raising reputation via being copied and treated as the second persons own creation without reference to its original content creator.

some posts on forums have no significant value nor cause loss to the original creator. so most just treat it as just "lazy-noob stuff".

true plagiarism is like the fakers pretending they invented bitcoin and then scam people.
basically no one cares about lazy-noob stuff, cant do anything about it. its the crazy scammy people trying to rip people off for real value/reputation you should put your efforts into calling out.

i dont consider the quotes the worse plagiarism ever seen. especially when it is not even in the same ball park as the 'im satoshi' attempts

seems the only rational thought in this topic.

but to add to the list. all the 'aid' NGO's profit alot too. they just have to spend the money on management fee's before year end to declare no unspend cashflow reserves to be declared 'non-profit'.

as for other posts comments.
thats not how it works.
citizens didnt need to advocate for/against war, for the US to invade the middle east in 2001.
citizens then did not abandon america. all that happened is the next election flipped from red to blue. and life carried on

citizens in developed democratic countries never abandon a country, they just flip to side with a different candidate.
the only time people abandon a country. is if the country they are in is getting bombed regularly to the point where bombs are hitting residential area's, not military targets. and where it is seen as not letting up or stopping any time soon where life cant just carry on as normal after the aftermath.

a future world war wont see governments declare that all citizens need to en-roll into the military(draft/conscription). instead it will be done by drones and long distance weaponry. by higher-ranked people causing damage but not having to risk their own lives.

targets wont be city centres of just residential. but instead area's near military bases.
EG if an enemy could wipe out a 50mile wide area. they'd take out the area which has a military base as that area has a high populous of military employees living within daily commute travel distance, rather than just some random residential city no where near a military base.

so if you were to 'prep' away from something. stay away from a daily commute distance of a military base.

careful what you wish for NRA will translate that to be:
'we love guns so show us your compassion and let us shoot where we please'


equal rights for all man..
                ..for all man..
                         ..man..
i think your missing something

evergrande's 'debt' is not $1.2trillion.. nor $120billion.. nor $12billion... but 10% of $1.2billion.
basically $120million

this debt is not a 'loss' to investors but just a non payment of interest.
this non payment of $120mill in interest is not to one institution. but a few. meaning each one has only 'lost' out on a portion of(less than) $120m

no bank is going to collapse because of under $120m loss of potential free money in the form of interest.
banks dont collapse just because some property manager defaults on mortgages of just say 100x $12m mansions. if that were the case LA or NY would have killed america already a thousand times over
..
the real next financial collapse will be in the pensions industry.

some red flags already mentioned. but ofcourse there was also the:
"helping you set up your government-approved wallet and receive your $30 BTC airdrop"

bye bye to all them $30's.

im pretty sure el salvador government has already send out official literature to its citizens on how they can set up their own wallet and start using bitcoin. without having to use some anonymous teenager to be an 'agent'

so thats your play. that LN always works unless one person generates 1350 invoices he never intends to pay.
and all genuine pizza customers had 100% success..(facepalm)
how utopian dreamer of you, to avoid actually analysing what the network can do and can be limited by to actually offer a up-to-date chart of "payment success rate" percentages.

maybe speak to your LN buddies and try to make a 'payment success' chart that can work out whats the near best 100% accepted amount, where near 100% routes would push through, and then the same again for different incremental amounts.

it wont cost anyone anything. after all you just admitted people can send thousands of test payments they never intend to pay(invoices).. so it is possible to accumulate such data periodically

then people can know what amount they can expect to use for payments without a headache or breaking promises with the destination.

so while many topics about LN turn into a utopian dreamer hype advert, i might as well give a real world advert about the bitcoin network.

meanwhile bitcoin network can send any amount someone has. no middle man issues. if you have $10 or $10bill in bitcoin value. you can send it, no question.. no co-signer authorisation needed. any value you have the destination will get, no headache, no if, no but, no excuses.
confirmation confirmed. no flimsy invoice fake promises to pay then pull out. just simple elegant payments

fiat is backed by the laws of:
'legal tender' that push fiat into being used as a national value medium.
'minimum wage' that push a minimum value that X is worth 1 hours labour
'court fines' that push that fiat must be used to pay punishments. not fish or beans
'taxes' paying for local and national public services

gold is backed by the cost of mining.
if you could mine gold for $2 with a spoon and coffee filter in your own yard.
everyone would be selling in the $5 range to 2.5x their effort. gold would not reach $1600
its success of demand is then found by its utility and need.
if no one needed gold for jewellery/tech, then no one would want to buy it and mining would stop

bitcoin is backed by the cost of mining
if you could mine bitcoin for $20 with a GPU and PSU in your own home office.
everyone would sell in the $50 range to 2.5x their effort. bitcoin would not reach $600(like PoS doesnt)
its success of demand is then found by its utility and need.
if no one needed bitcoin for remittance/trade, then no one would want to buy it and mining would stop
bitcoin also then has a 'reserve asset' value which is investment demand. but without utility of private trade. this 'investment asset value' wont have established

in a democracy. there is no need to kill.

in a tyranical authoritarian system, yea the leader should be shot if he aint willing to leave voluntarily

true story or not,
no bank or paypal ever had bitcoin storage.
so none of the bank or paypal story is relevant.

as for any exchange or darknet site.. they are all dead, no getting them back up and running.

his only 1% shot if true would be is if he luckily enough moved some unspent coins to bitcoin-QT (the only node wallet individuals had to independently store coin private keys on)

if he did do this then that 1% chance is only if he still has that computer and able to find the old wallet.dat file.

but the fishy part, was giving flimsy info and then asking a hacker to get him some coin without proof

to be a node operater/ independant dev that just 'follows' the current rules, yea anyone can make their own node thats wrote slightly different but still follows the main rules.
free range sheep can be happy playing in fields saying they are free... untill the see the shepherd and the barking dog..

but wanting to contribute to an upgrade/change.. well thats not an "anyone can do that" thing
you hinted that you have to get wide co-operation with the other node operators and devs or end up forking as an altcoin.OR be an accepted dev on cores github, and hope they like you enough to add your change to cores RC. both not as easy as people think. many idea's in github get rejected just by personality conflicts.

that alone shows its not as easy as you think. and not an anyone can do it.

secondly most of the other nodes are centralised to the "core" brand. and the devs of the core brand dont just let any old 'contributor' play around with a release candidate as they please. the top 6 devs have authority to accept or reject anything contributors put in. so there is a circle of 6 devs as management. and then ontop of them there is a single guy that does the compiling and verification of the release candidate.
so their actually is a central hierarchy that you wish to dismiss.. heck even that top guy(Wlad) admits he has too much authority and is a central point of failure for the project.

so if the 'consensus majority' are brand core, and a release of an update by core solely leans on the decision and signing authority of Wlad. then yes there is control. of bitcoin
Wlad doesnt want to abuse his control. but that does not mean its not there

funny part is. if the U.S had to attack china..
..by international law, the same general would have to inform china first.
research declaration of war


funny part is. trump signed the executive order to withdraw in a certain time, also trump signed to say that the taliban could and should take over once US troops leave.

so its trumps fault, not biden.
trump set the rules, biden was left with the mess and aftermath

ok you first. bye.

meanwhile the "over population" is not a natural land mass available problem. its a capitalist land ownership advert to sell at a premium. if a city sckyscaper owner says "overpopulation" what they really mean is :
'my property can be partitioned in half so i can sell it as 2x mini apartments for more money"

yea do the legwork. like contact the sources.
..
.. but badecker hates legwork. he is given a link to a record. the link includes the processes used, and the contact details of who done it. and badecker just cries 'too sciency to read' and claims it must be false.
someone else gives him a 'average joe' basic summary. badecker cries 'it not sciency'

both times badecker avoids the legwork.

badecker, tash and pretty much most anti-vax are as someone pointed out, faith not fact based

all those factors. are just a question of data.
EG if the AI had access to an exchanges user database, it can then easily associate the users trading patterns with when media drama occur.
EG flag the users that trade when there is media hype
it can then total up the exchange balance of those flagged users. to know how much total value could hit the order books when media drama occur. thus gauge how much volume trade could occur in a media drama hour, day, week

the issue is not pattern recognition or too many factors. computers can sift through billions of variables a second.
the real issue is the access to the data.

such data does exist. exchanges have it. their users database and their users order history..
but this is not publicly accessible data easy to retrieve outside the exchange.

that the crux of the issue.. not the pattern recognition. but the data access to then use in the pattern recognition

IF channels (other route hops before destination) had capacity then splitting can be done.
IF user has multiple channels and multiple balances to have that option
many if's you forgot to mention

he is not talking about the value HE has. so advice about HIM rebalancing is not the issue. its about making a payment along a route to a destination.. the liquidity of the route and the average value routes have across the network to have a good chance of success every time.

he is talking about the "payment success" rate thing.. like the near 100% for sub$1 amounts, the 10% success rate for pizza amounts in 2018.. or even this example more recently

maybe better to try to re-guage what a "payment success" % rate would be for 2021 for different amounts and actually answer the guys question rather then hide the issue with a "doesnt matter, just use LN whenever you want".. because from your own experience of 389 fails.. your experience is not a "doesnt matter just use LN whenever you want" thing, is it?.. heck you even had 5 channels and still had a 73% fail rate

even you know that routes need available balance along the route of multi-hops. and it does matter if one of those hops is bottlenecked. the guy wants to know whats the current easy amount that should pretty much always go through

your answer of "if you send many small amounts" is empty. as he was literally asking what "small amount" is, before you even said it..

EG most people are not going to open 5 funded channels just to buy the occasional coffee or pizza. most will just want to open one channel

so imagine in the non-utopian world(called the real world of real use). someone wants to buy a $18 pizza
but between the buyer and the pizza place there is a bottleneck
the bottlenecker only has $10 spare. and you want to send $18. sending it as 3x of $6 instead, is still going to fail.. because the bottleneck still only has $10!
meaning first 3rd, the bottleneckers $10 becomes $4, when sending $6
then the second 3rd fails because only $4 isnt enough to send $6
then the third 3rd fails because only $4 isnt enough to send $6

so the payer cant then send $18 to its destined destination to buy a $18 pizza because only a third can get through

so its not as easy as 'dont worry' as you pretend. and deep down you know it... you have personally experienced it. having over 380 fails with amounts under 0.0096btc (11% of your capacity)
so be honest, your now a big part of the altnet known as LN. so be part of the honest dialog about limitations and issues. how about try to actually gauge what "small" is in regards to "payment success"

if the largest 'success' you had was 11% of your capacity.
but you had a success:fail ratio of about 143:389.. atleast be honest about it and not pretend LN is easy and use whatever you want

no one bought bitcoin in 2009.
bitcoins value wasnt even valued in 2009

there were not even any illicit sites in 2009 using bitcoin
things like silkroad didnt even start until 2011

if someone was able to hack some random over 500coin stash(impossible).. why would they hand them to you

.. nice try topic creator, but your not the first to fake a loss in hopes people can hack you some free btc.

even the mainstream media such as BBC in recent decades transitioned from investigative journalism to just plain reporting. they just report what was reported to them, no scrutinisation. no real staking their reputation. and more so 'tell us a story and if it seems to be worthy of public interest we will report on it"

take the 2016 article where craid done the [using a publicly available 7yo signature] 'heres todays proof i am..'
the BBC didnt send the data off to a cryptographer for verification. didnt take any documents with them to later release with the article for people to scrutinise. but instead just say they were party to a 'signing event' and that they read other people on other forums where some people were not sure if the proof was proof, essentially.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36168863

when the article first published there was instant backlash and all BBC done was change the title from:
"Bitcoin creator reveals his identity"  to "Australian Craig Wright claims to be Bitcoin creator".

the article was also changed to recognise there was still doubt about Craig Wright's claim. but no sign of the BBC themselves doing any professional investigation or double checking with any cryptographer independently

though [real satoshi] made bitcoin and envisioned its future. i beleive in some of the early updates he didnt really care much for backing up private keys and could have lost them in some bug or forgetful incident. so dont expect to see any movements of them. back then bitcoin had no $ value so saving them was not that important. especially in a deflationary system where having less coins in circulation helps the value of the other coins that do circulate. so keeping them had no advantage if you never intend to spend them.

as for craig(faker). all he has ever had was a lying mindset and a publicly available list of public addresses which anyone can have(meaningless. no value ever) in 2011-2013 when craig first came across bitcoin. and alot of butt-kissing investors handing him money hoping to get rich off him.

AI if it had all the possible data to analyse as explained in my last post, could kinda predict price movements.
but here is the thing

if several bots all had the same data, and got triggered all when the same pattern appeared. guess what. those bots would then react and cause the pattern to break because the trigger caused a different action(due to the bots). this then causes a new variable to then try to predict.

EG if you knew everyday that a fruit stall owner sold 10 bananas an hour for 10 hours. and you then done something based on this info. such as buy up all his 100 banana's at dawn to benefit you, so that you could sell them for a few cents more during the day.
the following day. the fruit stall owner would then change his plans. by bringing 200 banana's to market, or reducing his price to compete against you. or many other things

you cant then rely on your 100 banana data from yesterday to help you tomorrow.

other examples are. if a btc market patten triggered to suggest a dip. and several bots then went on a buy spree. the suggested dip wont happen because the bots buying spree caused the price not to drop. this pattern broke.

its like pump and dump groups. without knowing that a prise rise spike was going to happen. you can cause one by chanting to enough believers that one would happen. get them to go on a buying spree and its then actually them that cause the spike due to your chanting.. thus a self fulfilling prophecy. without the suggestive chanting. the spike would not have happened.