Sometimes those living in a bubble have to get that bubble burst and their illusions shattered, specially those who think their plan is the plan. Their bubble bursts when something gets shoved somewhere of theirs.
The good news is that the day of reckoning is upon them, half a dozen of them have already faced the music and some were members of some 3-letter agencies, some 5-letter... Hopefully they won't learn who not to poke so the "cleanse" can continue...

He has already done a lot of things that has inflicted significant damage to economy of Argentine hence the 161% inflation rate. I don't really follow that news closely but off the top of my head the $3.2 billion that his government "printed" is one of the horribly crazy things he did.

I believer this "cycle" will continue for a bunch of more halvings because it is still supply rate reduction by 50% and the effects of it on the market is significant enough to tip the balance in favor of a big rise. For example in the coming halving the reward will drop from 900 bitcoins per day to 450 which means the miners will have 450 less bitcoins to sell daily. That is still a huge reduction. Less sell pressure means bigger rise.

Considering how Yemen has been like a bigger Gaza (surrounded in a way that even humanitarian aid couldn't reach them) and the the videos released from their weapons (like the one I posted above from their parade) we can clearly see these are not Chinese technology and they are not bought. They are manufactured domestically and are Iranian technology (eg. the advanced and deadly Shahed-136 loitering munition @3:09).

I should also mention that the defeat of US-Arab invasion was not just the economical aspect, even though it played an important role. It was the capability of Yemenis forces to hit back. And it was all thanks to their ingenious way of warfare.
For example they used a combination of drones and missiles. The drones were either targeting the Patriot batteries directly to open up the airspace for the follow up projectiles (could be different drones or missiles) or simply overwhelmed the batteries and exhausted their defensive missiles so that they don't have anything to defend against the follow up projectiles.

It depends on the type of the projectile that was used, there are many different types and the technologies differ from country to country that would also determine their effectiveness and accuracy.
From ASBMs that only 4 countries have (China, Russia, Iran and India) to more common stuff like AShM (launched from fighter jets) and of course the drones and cruise missiles.

As for accuracy I believe the most accuracy belongs to cruise missiles and the least accuracy is for ASBMs. Although in all of this some of the Iranian weapons are on an entirely different scale. For example in the realm of ballistic missiles Iranian BMs have less than 1 meter error for every 1000 km range while the next best thing belongs to United States that has from 100 meter up to 1 km error in some cases for every 1000 km range. Then there are Russian and Chinese accuracy that follow that up.

The case here is definitely using drones although we don't have any information about their type. It could be unmanned aircraft carrying AShM launched at the target or it could be a loitering munition (suicide drone) that hits its target at such a distance which means they either need satelite control (which I doubt Yemen has access to) or a very advanced artificial intelligence that is used in operations in long range and a network of command and control drones controlling the loitering munition (which is what they used). But the accuracy is high even against moving targets.

They haven't dared an airstrike either. The biggest thing they did recently (like 10 days ago) was send a couple of helicopters to intercept and attack some Yemeni small boats in the sea.

My speculation of what US regime is going to do against the Resistance in general is the same as a year ago: a proxy war by activating its terrorist cells.

Argentina is a special case that can't be used to extrapolate to other countries. The radical moves by the country is because of the radical who took power recently in their country who is known to be a "crazy person" (el-loco). He has been doing a lot of other crazy things too like starting to shut down the central bank and dump their local fiat.
His crazy actions even led to a whopping 160% inflation in Argentina!

If by "big bull run" you mean the usual 10000%-14000% rise we had in the past like 2017 (from $150 to $20000) then I don't think so because the global economy is in too much of a bad situation (specifically recession) that it would make such a massive rise extremely difficult due to continued panic dumps. The only case I can see that happening is if they start lowering interest rate and let the inflation rise while stopping the recession.

However, if by "bull run" you mean more and more rises every month in 2024 then I can see that happening very easily. Despite all I said above the adoption is still increasing and with the existing inflation we have seen an increase in adoption (people see Bitcoin as the hedge against inflation). And that can continue for months.

Each transaction creates at least one output that contains two things: (1) amount field which indicates how much bitcoin is being locked up and (2) the script which is the lock indicating how these coins can be unlocked or spent.
These outputs don't have an explicit field for their index, the index is the order inside the transaction output array itself.

This means all outputs have the two fields (value and scriptpub) including OP_RETURN outputs.

---

Each input of a transaction spending a UTXO has to address them by providing the (1) transaction ID of the tx containing the output being spent (2) index of the output being spent (3) the unlocking script which can be scriptsig or witness depending on the UTXO type and (4) a 4 byte sequence.

This means what you provide when spending UTXOs, what you provide depends on their type. It can contain one signature and one public key, it can contain multiple signatures and public keys, it can contain more complex scripts like a locktime or execution branches, etc.

This is one of the oldest and simplest scripts known as P2PKH or pay to pubkey hash.
In the outputs the first value that is being pushed to the stack after the OP_HASH160 is the hash160 digest of the public key.

In the inputs (scriptsig) there is no value field anymore since it is already present in the output that is being addressed and the signature (last value pushed to the stack or the first inside the script) is the ECDSA signature created using the private key that created the address.

The new outputs this new transaction creates is the same as before.

This page can be helpful to see more scripts and the standard one you used here:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script#Script_examples

According to some statistics there are about 10k terrorist attacks globally every year and even though we already know US has created and supported a lot of these terrorist groups and attacks like ISIS but I'm curious whether US regime has ever had to officially deny being behind a terrorist attack?

Keep in mind I'm not talking about an official statement long after the attack and after official accusation from the targeted country. But I'm talking about a case where they release a statement hours after the attack claiming to not-be behind the attack without being target of any kind of accusation yet?!

The reason why it made me curious because 4 days ago on January 3, 2024 there was a terrorist attack in Iran where two ISIS terrorist suicide bombers killed dozens of innocent civilians. Hours later in the same day at the very beginning of the press conference in Washington DC, Matthew Miller the spokesperson of Department of State addresses this attack and says United States is not behind this terrorist attack!!! The video is on Youtube and transcript is on state.gov

The flaw is in the bold part not in the data format.

Your mistake here is that you think just because you change the format from a simple string (address) to a simple image (QR) you are providing security. But it is just data in a different format and malware that can manipulate the string can also manipulate the JPG/PNG/... too. In fact its very trivial to write such a malware.

To solve the issue the "send" part should be addressed. For example if it is being sent through the internet, an additional encryption layer could be used like signing the address using a GPG key which the receiver can verify independently to ensure authenticity.

Yemen's reach is far. Two oil tankers that belonged to the Zionist regime were attacked in Indian Ocean north of Maldives. That is more than 2000 km away and there is the largest concentration of US navy between the two

That sounds like a very risky investment because best case scenario is that your investment would lie there idle and without any profit, there may even be losses because it takes years for them to come up with an actual working solution that can then be mass deployed at a large scale and then become profitable. The first states would take decades, that's decades without seeing any profit.

Not to mention that with worsening global situation when all resources are going to the weapons manufacturers as NATO members have depleted most of their storages, there is not much room left for R&D into fixing energy problems! That further extends the end date of such technological breakthroughs.

That's an irrelevant example because the problems the blockchain technology is fixing aren't going anywhere but the energy crisis we are discussing in this topic will end LONG before we see a working solution for a reliable alternative energy source.

I'd say all the energy crisis cases I've discussed so far in different topics will end by the end of 2024 if what they say about US getting ready for a "strategic defeat" is correct.

Nobody should ever "invest" in Bitcoin because Bitcoin is not an investment, nor is it a way to get rich or make profit.

Bitcoin is the only existing decentralized and censorship resistance form of money. Instead of thinking about making more of your inflating fiat without cap that keeps being printed billions and trillions at a time, try thinking about using the only money that has a cap and will never be printed more than 21 million BTC.

Well McDonald's is a franchise and the central corporation owns all the rights to a lot of things involved in each of the branches and all the revenue and a losses are also going up the stream to the main corporation; so I used the company's market cap not how much the sub-branch is worth.

In my opinion, the corporation has just found someone to hit back inside Malaysia and in the future they may try it elsewhere too specially considering that this article claims it is much bigger than just being in Malaysia. For example it says there is a 70% drop of sales in Egypt which is a pretty significant dump.
https://www.newarab.com/news/mcdonalds-ceo-says-gaza-boycott-campaign-hurting-mena-sales

It wasn't yesterday, it was 2 days ago and it was down to $41.5k or better said the drop was at most -4.5% which is not categorized as a "crash" in bitcoin market.

It wasn't a crash, a crash would be going to $39k and below.
Such small drops are normal after a big rise, specially when the momentum to rise more stops. The short term traders sell to take their short term profit out and get ready to rebuy in the follow up dip.

FUD can always contribute by causing a panic sell but when it comes to ETF, people still don't care enough to sell because of its rejection let alone because of some random post about possibility of it. Keep in mind this is like the hundredths time SEC has rejected different ETFs.

I think it's a frog not a rat

Bitcoin is too volatile for your theory to apply here though.

Whether you like or not coming up with fancy names for an attack like calling it Decentralized Finance, Ordinals, etc. doesn't make them real or valuable for that matter. None of it is part of the protocol, they are abusing the bitcoin blockchain as cloud storage only and the real deal happens on a centralized platform where a scam such as BRC-20 interprets the arbitrary data in the blockchain for you.

If anybody thinks something like that which is clearly centralized is worth something they don't even belong in the Bitcoin world!

What you are talking about is the revenue loss which is in the millions of dollars as the articles say and the suing amount is in that range.

But I believe what @Latviand is talking about is the total market valuation of these companies that has gotten dumped as their stock crashed. For example Starbucks shares has gotten dumped about 13% ever since November and that kind of dump in a hundred-billion dollar company is billions of dollars loss ($106 billion Starbucks and $211 billion McDonald's market cap).

My opinion is that even though this is also a decent indication of the effects of boycotts on these companies but it is not the most solid one because there are lots of other things affecting the stock market.
For example SBUX has been dumping ever since April 2023 since the company is struggling with a lot of other issues; so this latest 13% dump could be the continuation of that same dump with boycotts being a secondary effect that may have intensified the dump.
On the other hand when we look at MCD we see that it has got pumped in the same period which proves that this is not the most solid indicator to use.

This has to be your personal record of the shortest distance between your double standards

It is you who is comparing apples and oranges. In your both examples you used legitimate use cases of the service (buying stuff, users of Facebook, etc.) but when it comes to Bitcoin you are counting the attackers as legitimate use case!

Every system is made for a purpose and when you use it for something else or break the rules of that system, your actions would be counted as abuse. For example if you use your Facebook account to post some random stuff every 10 seconds, your account will be banned and nuked in matter of minutes.
It's the same in Bitcoin, when you try to exploit the protocol and turn Bitcoin into cloud storage, that's an abuse and it should be banned. The only difference between Bitcoin and a centralized service is that Bitcoin is decentralized so such decision makings are extremely slow.

As I've said a million times this is not about fees nor about what is being stored in chain. This is all about the fact that Bitcoin is being used as cloud storage whereas it is supposed to be a payment system. And it is ONLY possible through an EXPLOIT.

That's just outright wrong.
Ignoring the fact that block size hasn't been 1MB for years, for some reason you said all these stuff in previous pages to get here (I wonder what reason ) to say that "people using bitcoin as their cloud storage is OK and we should increase the block size so they can have access to a bigger "cloud space" for their arbitrary data!"

This is a very good point you raised here. They're not used to not getting their way which is why they are trying to show some form of reaction and at the very least appear to have all the power!

Yes and no! You can't sue regular people, obviously. So they have to find a representative to sue, a group or an organization, in other words something centralized or a door that they can kick down.
In this sense this is like Bitcoin, they can't ban Bitcoin or they can't prevent regular users from using it but they can kick down the door of anything centralized like CEX or even mining pools and exert their power there.
But the nature of the act is the same, it is "banning Bitcoin" or it is "suing the people who refuse to consume their products".

The "land of opportunity"