Palestinians aren't an "external force" in their own country that is currently occupied! That would be like saying "Russia has the right to defend itself inside Ukrainian soil that they occupy like Crimea"!!!

Just like Russians have no right to be in the occupied lands in Ukraine, the Zionist regime calling itself Israel, doesn't have any right to even be in Palestine let alone use any force against the Palestinians (whether civilians or the armed forces defending them such as Hamas).

In other words the Zionists are the "external force" that are occupying the Palestinian soil and killing people of Palestine. According to the international law and the United Nations charter nothing can impair the right of Palestinians from using any means necessary to fight against the invaders that are committing genocide in their lands. Be it in occupied Palestinian lands like Quds or the semi-occupied regions such as Gaza and West Bank.

That's true. Their time and resources are too limited to go after shitcoins that nobody uses. The same reason why they never go after tens of thousands of other similar shitcoins that nobody really uses.

Bitcoin has never been coupled with traditional markets to decouple now. What affects bitcoin is the economy on a larger scale. For example when recession hits the global economy (like during COVID or in the past 2 years with the wars), people tend to liquidate their assets which means selling bitcoin and stocks and gold and ... so they all come down together but that doesn't mean there is any correlation between these markets. In other words people didn't panic sell their bitcoin because the stock market crashed for example. We have seen time and time again that when traditional markets tank, bitcoin doesn't care and it rises.

What I'm pointing out in my post is the economy in general is not looking good specially with energy market being too volatile and unpredictable. We have the conflicts in oil rich regions then on top of that the OPEC producers keep cutting production (they agreed to cut production by another huge amount, 2.2 mil bpd in January).

This create a chain of events. Higher energy price and shortage leads to higher inflation which the governments desperately try to lower by increasing interest rates which then creates recession (or worsens the ongoing recession) and at the same time high interests suck the money out of other markets into the government bonds (government pockets) because they become profitable.
That could potentially put a sell pressure on bitcoin and at the very best slow down the inevitable rise.

The only way I can see a big rally this month or next year is either if energy price comes down (to something like $30) or with high energy prices if FED stops trying to manipulate the market by increasing interest rates and let the inflation rise, in which case bitcoin would shoot to the moon in no time. Just like 2017.

Democracy died many years ago in US, but if that weren't enough the last nail in the coffin was during the events leading to January 2021 when hooligans raided the Capitol because of the orders given by their hooligan leader who was never prosecuted for his crimes...

If it comes to that I don't think they'd stop at shutting down the forum. There'd be arrests too... It wouldn't be the first time they do something like that either!

Start by checking this topic: [overview] Recover Bitcoin from any old storage format so that you can tell us what kind of data you actually have because what you call "paper phrase" is unclear and isn't something we can help you with.

If there is a door to be kicked down, the authorities will eventually kick it down. That's the problem with centralization, which means the solution is to eliminate centralization (like what we did with Bitcoin). However, there isn't any solid progress in developing decentralized social networks, forums, etc. which is the unfortunate part.

This is the weird part to me since by definition these are also mixers and where functionality is concerned there is no difference between these and the centralized mixer mixing coins!

I personally have always viewed multi-sig equal to multi-party. Meaning for example 2 or 3 partners in a business each hold a key to a 2 of 3 multi-sig to be able to spend the funds together. That's where multisig signs best in my opinion.

For a single user, I'd stick to a simple single-sig setup with separate backups too. Specially when it is coins you want to place in cold storage and not touch for a very long time.

The only downside I see is that you generally don't want to keep or use a single private key (address), so what you actually backup is your seed phrase (that generates many keys you'd use). Considering there aren't any standard way of encrypting a seed phrase (as opposed to BIP38 for single private key) using a seed+password setup becomes complicated again compared to multi-sig where there are multiple seed phrases.

There are certain things like derivation paths that end users don't really need to know. The wallet should take care of them under the hood automatically. Like what Electrum does.

It is not SHA256 that finds 1 block per 10 minutes on average and Scrypt finding 12. It is the Proof of Work algorithm and more specifically how difficulty and difficulty adjustment is setup in the cryptocurrency that uses these algorithms under the hood. Otherwise there are shitcoins (copies of bitcoin) out there using SHA256 and producing more blocks per minute that bitcoin does per 10 minutes on average.

I'd say things have not changed much compared to previous months. The world is still struggling with armed conflict, high energy prices and shortage, inflation and recession. The effects of all that on the economy also affects bitcoin in a negative way preventing its rise despite the tremendous amount of potential it has for rise.

As if we didn't have enough wars, another battle started in South American. Another region where US is destabilizing! It also happens to be a very oil rich region called Venezuela.

You should go check some numbers and come back. We are talking about trillions of dollars wasted on US war machine to murder people around the world. That is not something that bitcoin can cover.

Besides, the whole point of printing money out of thin air is to not have to spend money! If they want to acquire bitcoin they would have to first spend a lot of money and then have a restricted budget that they can no longer surpass. But with dollar they print trillions in a blinking of an eye to feed the regime's bloodthirst.

That's true but my point is that we have been on this path of digitalization and full monitoring for a long time, even before the concept of CBDC was introduced. They are just trying to centralize it more and force it on the population under a fancy name. Otherwise in this day and age people aren't using cash that much already and majority of their transactions are already easily surveilled.

Current banking system already has a record of all your financial activity that goes through them without having a fancy disguise for it and on top of that there is a massive database in NSA with your every move inside of it, your financial activity is the least of it. After all they have to use their tens of billions of dollars budget for something!

THEY aren't optional, Bitcoin is. You have the option to choose bitcoin to exit that corrupt system and cut the hands that are in your pocket.

It is not about being beneficial, it is about using Bitcoin how it is supposed to be used.
It is trivial to recognize transactions that aren't. Any transaction that is injecting an arbitrary data into the chain by exploiting the protocol is abusive.

As I told you elsewhere, abuse is not 100% preventive but it is and should be made difficult. In this example of yours if the abusers are limited to only 20 to 30 bytes, we've already succeeded in preventing abuse to a great deal.

I'm not suggesting disabling of anything, least of all OP codes. I'm saying the size restrictions that existed in Bitcoin before SegWit and before specifically witness version 1, in form of both consensus and standard rules have to be applied again.

Not transactions, but arbitrary data that is injected by exploiting the protocol.

Correction: The equal treatment of all transactions that are transferring bitcoin not transactions that are exploiting the protocol and treating bitcoin as cloud storage which is against the principle of Bitcoin.

The important thing to realize is that halving is a very slow process and it becomes less and less significant on each halving. That means for example in the first halving the reward dropped by a whopping 25BTC which is a huge decrease. However in the coming halving the reward will only drop by 3.125BTC which is a much smaller decrease.
And most important of all, it takes nearly a century for the reward to reach zero and speculating what the network will be like by then is moot.

I wouldn't call CBDCs good or bad. They are what they are and that's not a new thing. People aren't entering a new jail, it is the same jail as they were in before with a new name. They entered that jail the day centralized banking was introduced and they went deeper into it as it grew specially with digital banking.

The centralized authority will hunger for more control and surveillance. The only thing that should matter to us is to preserve Bitcoin's principles so that we can keep it as that "exit option", not try to change the centralized world.

It depends on how much $339 is worth
Considering how dedollarisation has been speeding up and how possible it is to see dollar value tanking hard, bitcoin reaching millions against dollar is not as far a you'd think. After all the current transaction fees of 1 sat/vbyte is about 300 in a bunch of currencies like the Colombian Peso

Both of these approaches have the same flaw. They see Bitcoin as a one dimensional thing they are trying to value. Bitcoin is multidimensional; Bitcoin is money so it can be used for payments which means it can not be compared with gold that is only store of value; at the same time Bitcoin as money can also be used as store of value so it can not be compared with currencies (fiat like dollar) that are useless as store of value because of their inflation.
This means both approaches are flawed in measuring bitcoin value.

That's another flawed approach that only focuses on a single aspect of the much more complex Bitcoin.
Unlike social media, people don't have to use bitcoin every day for it to have a value. Remember the store of value characteristic? You can buy and hold bitcoin and that is demand even if you don't spend those coins for years.

That is volatility of price which has little to do with value.

Unlike previous approaches, this one is no longer flawed. I wouldn't call it challenge either, this is outright wrong.
The problem is that they are still thinking in terms of something like gold and the "production cost" which is completely unaffected by gold price. For example if gold is worth $1 it still costs the same to extract it from the ground, melt it, etc. as in case it were worth a $1,000,000,000 because the process is not affected by the price (the incentive to mine gold is).

But when it comes to Bitcoin because of how mining (Proof of Work and difficulty adjustment works) things are completely different. If bitcoin price were $1, the cost of mining would also be low and close to $1 and if bitcoin price goes up to $1,000,000,000 that means the cost of mining bitcoin would also go up to be close to $1,000,000,000.
Note that I say "close to" not equal because of being decentralized and the fact that cost of mining is wildly different in different parts of the world (eg. electricity price from $0.0012 to $0.54) and other factors.

I may be crazy but I always felt like they first created the price model then built their logic around that to explain why it works.

Lower transaction fee will be a side product not the reason.
The reason why I want the Ordinals Attack be stopped is because it is exploiting the protocol and is abusing the system.

From the day Bitcoin was created. And why do people insist on making this about "benefit" and "usefulness" of the garbage? It is abuse. Bitcoin is not cloud storage. From day one it was created to be a payment system with a blockchain that acts as the ledger for those payments. When people use it to store arbitrary data (regardless of what that data is) it is considered abuse and should be prevented.

It has a lot of value and they are storing the "cure for cancer" on bitcoin blockchain. Is that good?
Now it should still be stopped because bitcoin is not cloud storage

Did Warhol come to your home and force his "art" down your throat or nail them to your walls by force?
No they made a special place to showcase that "art" and you could choose to go there if you wanted to. That's the same with Bitcoin. We already have special cryptocurrencies that act as cloud storage (like filecoin) we also already have special cryptocurrencies made for token creation (like ethereum) and we have bitcoin that is a payment system.

... and yet people insist on forcing us to change the utility of bitcoin, one of its fundamental characteristics which is to be a payment system and change Bitcoin to be a cloud storage!!!
Honestly, that has to be stopped.

Do you even know what this topic is about?

Let me help you one more time. This topic is about the conflict in West Asia and possibility of it entering specifically the Red Sea which could affect the energy trade routes
It has nothing to do with Russia, current oil/gas prices in Europe, German budget, etc.

As I've already explained in previous posts (which I know you haven't bothered reading any) the chances of this possibility has gone down as time passed. At this point we don't have any reason to speculate a spike because of the events analyzed in this topic because the Armed Forces of Yemen are only seizing any ships that belongs to the terrorist organization Israel. And nobody has the capability to do anything about it hence there won't be any expansion of the conflict.

Privacy has to be the default option if we want the solution used by majority of users to offer actual privacy. Otherwise imagine if your mixed transaction contained 20 inputs 19 of which came from users who don't care or don't know how to improve their privacy and for exampled connected to a honeypot server to sync on clear-net! Obviously the 20th one that followed all privacy improving steps has no privacy and the mixed transaction won't offer any privacy whatsoever.

This is the same criticism that exists about altcoins that claim to offer privacy but it is not the default option.

Spam attacks by nature are unpredictable because there is an attacked that will continue to fill the mempool with junk to intentionally inflate the fees.
A spam attack such as Ordinals is a special type of attack that provides the incentive for the attackers (that also happen to be regular newbies) to attack bitcoin themselves without feeling like they are performing such an attack.

The only solution for this is to either patch the exploit they are using in the Bitcoin protocol to perform this attack. Which doesn't seem likely in the near future since a small part of the community still insists that preventing this type of abuse is considered "censorship"!!!!
Or the other solution is to wait and wish for the scam market where they rip people off with the junk they inject into the blockchain to die. Which is very unlikely considering how the scam has grown and how greed works. We've already seen it in the ICO scams in 2017 that died but never disappeared.