The Aussies seem to be having the party for cryptocurrency-related news as of late, and while thee trolls and the FUDsters are at it causing yet another drama and wave of fear-mongering, those big corporations and services are trying to get their hands onto some 'uncharted' territories for crypto. KuCoin is also establishing itself in the global crypto community and with their partnership with Bitcoin Australia (which is a pretty determined group), it will certainly get the boost the Aussies needed in terms of spreading crypto awareness.

I don't think that websites, especially bitcointalk and CMC dictate the actual sentiment of the market towards any given coin. People might lose interest browsing over these sites knowing that viable and truthful information isn't found within the constraints of the said forum but that wouldn't stop them from trading bitcoin just because they aren't visiting both. Most pros in the trading scene don't visit these sites, they flock somewhere else wherein noise-to-signal ratio is low and trolls aren't around.

I understand that you're trying hard, but please, try harder when it comes to trolling.

This has been quite the rhetorical question of August-September here in bitcointalk, but to at least give you an answer, there aren't any plans to switch over to a greener alternative as of the moment, and I'm pretty sure the community and the devs are aware of what's in store for the bitcoin network regarding power consumption. Some miners have already made their own moves by moving into remote areas wherein internet is still accessible but they get the power of hydroelectric plants, with costs which are not lucrative and maintenance is easier since the area is a natural temperate region. Some farms in China have been relocating to the mountains to seek greener and cheaper power, great operating conditions for the miners which greatly reduces the power in cooling these machines. Perhaps a new algorithm would be introduced which is quite on par with the integrity PoW offers as of the moment, but as far as that change goes, there aren't any discussions yet.

I wasn't personally affected by this given that I live overseas from America, but I do know that it impacted the global markets and caused some severe turn of events over the course of a few months, especially in America wherein many people are laid off by their employers even though they were assured that they'd keep their jobs amidst the crashes in the market. As for Satoshi working on his brainchild, I don't think the great recession has ignited his interest on creating bitcoin, and seeing on the whitepaper that he has already been doing some researches on it prior before the Lehman Brothers' bankruptcy, it seems that it took years before he completed it, and it just so happened that everything is spiralling out of control after he's done his opus.

Bitcoin faucets ended up being worth the operators' and the users' time years ago, 2013 to be precise when bitcoin's price gained traction and ATH was achieved. The reason for this is that operators don't want to shell out more money and ads that are embedded within the faucet site don't pay too well, so it only ends up being a dire effort for the time and money an operator puts into his/her faucet. On the user side of things, a few satoshis won't make the cut, and we know people wants to make it big even if they are newbs on the field. They end up trying but also end up tired clicking ads and solving captchas in exchange for virtual pennies that they can't even use to spend on even the cheapest of things online.

A dealer on California has been doing this for their lambos for the past 2 or 3 years, and I don't know whether the deal is still up. This is a good thing considering that bitcoins can be used to obtain something IRL, but the only problem I have with this is it poses a negative impression on the general media and masses that bitcoins can only be used on expensive purchases and not on something they can afford. People will only care over something if they know they can benefit or they can be a part of it, and this here isn't that 'thing' for the masses, so it will not cause some massive bump.

It seems like day by day, more and more companies are inclining toward blockchain payments, which doesn't seem to be a good nor a bad idea depending on where you look. Giant companies who rely on mobile payments now realize the prowess of a blockchain-powered payment system, as oppose to their traditional payment system which is more susceptible and prone to hacks and downtime for maintenance. This doesn't do bitcoin any good but to know that companies are trying to improve the security of their services is a win-win for consumers and the owners alike.

This is actually a great move to spread awareness regarding bitcoin. While the ones they are selling is in the form of $1 candies, they'd instill curiosity on the minds of those who bought it or came across it. Nice marketing stunt which doesn't hurt the bank but gives awareness overall. With this move, we at least know that Walmart loves the concept of bitcoin, or just using the hype it might generate to boost up sales.

Here in the country,  4-day workweek bill has already been approved by the Congress, but the employers are warning the gov't that it's not good to compress all the workloads in just 4 days, no matter how advanced the technology they're using currently. It gives workers more time to rest, however if they are going to add the hours of a day, it will still result for a worker feeling tired and empty at the end of every shift. Also, if anything they need to define what jobs are to be benefiting from such a proposition, because obviously some jobs need 24/7 coverage, prime example is for security of buildings/properties.

Not a fan of such, but if ever this gets approved, many data security firms and experts would surely give an ill remark for this. Idk what prompted them to create such a bill but as far as I know, the draft is created as anti-terrorism measures mostly which I think shouldn't really be an issue to this day. Companies and governments having backdoors and complete access to a personal device seems already invasive and that's not good in any way. If anything, it's a scary thought.

IMO, it is not, and it shouldn't be considered as a solid investment in the first place.

Some newbie investors who made it big are in the game at the right time, when everything is going nuts towards a new ATH. Right now, with the current situation of bitcoin being uncertain, newbie traders would likely develop anxiety for their funds rather than earn profit within a few weeks/months. At best, newbies can check the stock market scene and mutual funds on their local rather than jumping directly to an extremely risky investment/asset just because the gains portrayed are promising and lucrative.

This is actually pretty good for the future of crypto in Japan, and if people really want to improve the security of the exchanges they are approving, Japan would be the best example for that. It's amazing how dedicated and serious the Japanese government is when it comes to cryptocurrencies, especially bitcoin. They're so careful nowadays knowing that the Gox fiasco happened in their soil a few years ago, and knowing how Japanese value their honor and integrity, they don't want a similar scenario to ever happen again.

Seems legitimate enough to me. While India is busy scrambling words for bitcoin and other crypto, they are planning to create their own cryptocurrency. Isn't that ironic coming from someone who opposes the thought of crypto while promoting their own creation? Perhaps they are thinking that legalizing crypto and bitcoin first before they introduce their own would severely affect the growth and success of their lovely cryptocurrency. There'd be a massive gap of interest between a government-issued crypto and a decentralized one, so in order to combat that scenario, blocking any legal advancements for bitcoin is the way they are taking right now

The willingness and the eagerness of the society itself to transition from a cash-based society to a cashless society is what's actually hurting the unbanked, not the country or the regulators themselves. Knowing how fast, convenient and secure cashless payments are, it's a no-brainer that most people would opt to use it rather than receive coins and paper that could potentially be stolen and hard to get back. The downside is, some people, especially the unbanked are left behind in this cause; it takes a lot of requirements and financial capacity to get yourself banking services.

it's kinda sad to think that there's nothing we can do to bridge the gap between the rich and the poor, and sometimes, compromises hurts all sides of the story, too.

This clearly states the intentions of the US banks involved in Marshall Islands' foreign bank relations: they want the utmost control to the country's financial relations and make sure that the country doesn't deviate from what their standards are. Perhaps I might be overthinking the said move, and a country losing a tight financial relationship to a foreign bank is somewhat hard but to think that they'd be cutting ties after the country decided to adopt cryptocurrency makes their motive questionable.

However this pans out and whichever way this goes, it's good that the officials in Marshall Islands are looking for different ways to potentially boost their economy and alleviate their dependency on others. It's a good move, I'd say.

Of all the things you've enumerated, the BlackRock ETF is the one I'm rooting for knowing its status in the global financial markets. With that kind of influence vested on the bitcoin market, it is no doubt that the price will follow accordingly to the hype. Not only does it gives unique interest from the institutional investors sector but it also gives credibility towards bitcoin's capability to handle the boom of global investments. Goldman Sachs' might also be a game changer for the short-term but we'll see that once everything materializes.

In a way, we've unconsciously contributed to the market manipulation on an exchange-level, but with the current regulations set in place to combat the said phenomenon, I can say that manipulation is somehow lessened or discouraged through it. However, manipulation is still a huge issue for bitcoin and the crypto market in general, and the only thing current regulations prevented are exchanges participating in the said manipulation but not those traders who are actively controlling the market.

Keeping coins in an exchange is an issue of security rather than manipulation IMO, though it has been hinted that exchanges use these deposited coins to make some form of fake volume and depth to make it look like something's happening so it could still be possible.

In a way, yes, and most giant companies are using the word 'blockchain' to entice the masses into their propositions and to exaggerate their claims for a certain service they offer. We can't deny it, blockchain is really a good application to integrate on some established services, but to overly use the word for something so typical seems overrated to me. Also, most ICOs are banking on this word to garner interest and support, which I think is not a good marketing strat to begin with.

Blockchain is a good innovation, but not everything needs the blockchain to be better or to survive.

At this point in time, anyone buying bitcoin isn't there for the payment protocol but rather the potential profits they could be making if ever they bought it at the right time. Bitcoin's protocol for payments is still top-notch even with the advent of newer, better cryptocurrencies, and perhaps people are not that naive to buy a whole bitcoin if they don't know what to do with it. I know some people who are buying a whole bitcoin for online payments, and makes sure that it fulfills that duty they intended it to be.

If you believe on the integrity of the exchange that you're submitting your documents to, why not? Personally before I submitted my documents for KYC, I went over the headquarters of a local exchange and asked for their certifications and permits which they gladly showed me. They catered to my questions well and know that these guys are the real deal. Also, I made clear that once any of my documents are leaked or involved in some matter to which I know nothing about, they'd be the first one to receive legal actions from me. Making it clear between you and your exchange often helps in getting KYC'd without any hidden agenda for your personal info.