+1 Exposing scams in any field of endeavour is a noble cause.

I should point out that the reverse does not hold at all. In a situation where one would trust the NSA or GHCQ with certain data one still should not trust Microsoft or Apple with that data! Microsoft for example has shared its source code with the FSB and the PLA, It has also allowed its trade marks to be used to sell computers with built in malware that breaks SSL in order to serve ads, as in the recent case of Lenovo. As for Apple its security is simply horrid as the recent "nude selfie" case so aptly demonstrated.

It is fair to say that one area Monero is still lacking is a GUI Wallet for GNU/Linux. Yes there is myMonero.com but that is an alternative to blockchain.info. The choice faced by one wishing to run one's own Monero client is 1) Learn the GNU/Linux terminal or 2) Run the risk of providing one's private keys to the NSA via Microsoft’s membership in the PRISM program. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29. Of course those of use willing to learn the GNU/Linux terminal can take advantage of the current situation and purchase cheap XMR. My take is this situation will not last long; however in the meantime this may well be a reason why DRK is still trading at over 5X the capitalization of XMR.

While this is true for fiat held in bank accounts it is not the case when fiat is held as cash.  Some of us are old enough to remember the days when a significant proportion of the population held their fiat as cash, and cash was the primary method used for day to day transactions. In addition securities were also in many cases held as bearer instruments. It is only in the last 40 years that fiat has changed in this way.

By the way XBT and XMR are also vulnerable to this issue. Holding XBT on deposit with MtGox is like holding EUR on deposit in  Cypriot bank. Holding XBT on the blockchain is like holding EUR is one's pocket. A similar argument can be made for XMR.

The one advantage that XBT and XMR has over fiat is that it is possible to securely hold substantial amounts in "cash" form, provided that one takes some simple but unpopular precautions. One has say a flat no to DRM infected propriety operating systems such as those sold licensed by Microsoft and Apple, and only use FLOSS operating systems such as GNU/Linux and rooted Android.

Edit: Why someone will blindly trust Microsoft or Apple, and at the same time not trust the NSA or GHCQ, with their data defies any rational explanation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29#mediaviewer/File:Prism_slide_5.jpg.

Fake ask volume motivated by short term trading attempts to suppress the price and / or drive sellers to bid walls must always be prepared to face its nemesis: A long term buyer willing to tolerate some slippage using a market order to obtain a substantial position, followed of course by this buyer taking delivery. This is the kind of thing that can set off a buying panic as the shorts are squeezed to the wall.

http://www.candlestickforum.com/PPF/Parameters/16_474_/candlestick.asp A hammer is a bullish reversal signal.

The Winklevoss Investment Trust could literally provide Buffett with the opportunity to put his money where his mouth is by insuring the Bitcoin held by the ETF. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=973048.msg10635752#msg10635752.

There are very few insurance underwriters in the world with the resources to take on this kind of risk. Lloyd’s of London comes to mind so does General Re owned by non other than Warren Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway. Warren Buffet's opinion on Bitcoin is well known, but would he be prepared to accept a massive short position on Bitcoin as an insurance underwriting risk? Furthermore what kind of premium would he want?

This is a fun video to watch. I just made sure to download a copy to my hard drive and will keep it safe with appropriate backup just in case it get taken down. Who knows what the future may bring? It may real fun to watch this some time in the future.  

Edit: I must admit to buying a small portion of this dump. 

I have just completed an additional donation of 2000 XMR. PM Sent

I am 57 and started using Bitcoin at age 54. I also use Monero, cash, cheques, credit cards, wire transfers, but not debit!.

I will start by saying that the age range most likely to embrace Bitcoin are those below the age of 30 followed by those over the age of 50 and below the age of 80. The least likely age group is between 30 and 50, possibly followed by those over the age of 80. Someone age 18 will have a far greater change of convincing his grand parents to embrace Bitcoin than his parents and may even have a better chance with his great-grandparents than with his parents. The first thing to understand is that many teenagers rebel against the values of their parents generation. To the parent this is a rebellious teenager, but to the grandparent more often than not this is payback for the teenage rebellion they endured!. Many companies marketing to the baby boomer generation understand this psychology very well.

The baby boomer generation grew up under the constant threat of nuclear annihilation, and can best be described as rebelling against the "establishment" in every conceivable way. This contrasts sharply with the generation that followed notably generation X which to a large degree rebelled against the rebels and became very pro-establishment. The 60's and early 70's were about saving the world. The 80's and 90's were about owning the world. If a 60 year old does not have a Facebook page it is not because they do not know how to create a page, it is far more likely because they do not trust Facebook with their personal information.

In payments the most significant change in the last 40 years have been the replacement of cash and bearer (cash like) instruments with accounts under the control of the "establishment". Many baby boomers react to this change more often than not with a combination of fear, distrust, and suspicion. Bitcoin and similar crypto currencies become more often than not a return to their comfort level of bearer instruments. The easiest way to introduce Bitcoin to someone over the age of 60 is to describe it as "cash that you can use on the Internet", "there is no need for PayPal", "there is not risk of identity theft"  etc, and be prepared to engage the senior in a conversation about the horrors of mass identity theft such as Target etc.

Edit: Anyone over the age of 50 who was exposed to computer technology in their teens or early 20's, their exposure was most likely  as a programmer rather than as a passive consumer of content locked down with DRM.

MRL stands for Monero Research Lab. MRL 4 can be found here https://lab.getmonero.org/pubs/MRL-0004.pdf

So if I understand this correctly, for example 0.003475895753 XMR is considered dust but

0.003 XMR
0.0004 XMR
0.00007 XMR
0.000005 XMR
0.0000008 XMR
0.00000009 XMR
0.000000005 XMR
0.0000000007 XMR
0.00000000005 XMR
0.000000000003 XMR

are not considered dust.

FLOSS alone is not enough to provided protection; this is the main reason why the FSF released GPLv3. It is also a critical difference between Android and Chrome OS. While an Android device can be made into a telescreen, a Chromebook cannot.  The key difference is the presence of GPL V3 code deep in Chrome OS.

As for cloud services that provide privacy this is possible and exists today. The key technique that is common to privacy respecting cloud services is to encrypt the data on the client side. The service provider simply never sees the data in the clear. Of course this pre-supposes that the client device itself is secure.

Here are some examples:
https://mega.co.nz/ Cloud storage and sharing
https://protonmail.ch/ Secure Email and cloud storage. This company had a very successful Indiegogo campaign over 5x its goal
https://www.senditonthenet.com/ File upload and sharing

There are more starting all the time.

Of course we also have
https://mymonero.com XMR wallet
https://blockchain.info/ XBT wallet

As for secure clients one can of course splurge on the Purism Librem15 https://www.crowdsupply.com/purism/librem-laptop. The crowd sourcing campaign is again well over the target. Fully configured  this Libre Laptop can set one back 3300 USD. One can add a blu-ray player, that can only be used to play MPAA blu-ray disks, using the installed OS, by breaking the DRM! It is critical to understand that a computer or device cannot have two masters. It can either protect the privacy of the user and secure the user's XMR or protect the 19th century business models of organizations such as the MPAA but not both!

So there is hope.

Edit:


Not with the zero knowledge on the cloud providers part model of the examples above. In fact the cloud provider could in fact be using Windows Server on Azure and the privacy of the client data is secure, since neither the service provider, Microsoft or Microsoft's spy partners would have access to the client data in the clear.

Desktop in this context also means laptops. Mobile is another issue entirely. Apple is a dominant player and IOS is literally a portable version of the telescreen in George Orwell's 1984. One should forget about any kind of privacy there. Android on the other hand can be made to respect the user's privacy. Unfortunately most Android devices are sold to the end user without root access. This again makes an un-rooted Android device a portable version of the telescreen in George Orwell's 1984, though with considerably more freedom than the Apple version, but also lacking in privacy. The solution is to root the Android device thereby wresting control away from the manufacturer and or telecom. Then one can lock the device down and have privacy and security. So again we are left a small fraction of people that truly have privacy and security.

No debate there. This is the primary reason why most people have little of no privacy. It is also the main reason why there are so many breaches of computer security affecting individuals, organizations, corporations, governments etc. worldwide.

If one takes out the part of "along with it only being minable on linux(which hardly anyone uses)" I am in agreement with you.

The security argument is very simple. By delaying the Microsoft Windows release a POW coin that uses CPU mining can avoid a botnet 51% attack when it is at its most vulnerable point just after release. This is because botnets are powered by compromised Microsoft Windows computers.

As for security agencies take a look at the PRISM program: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29 In particular at the following slide: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29#mediaviewer/File:Prism_slide_5.jpg. When on entrusts one's data to Microsoft or Apple, and this happens every time one uses their propriety software, one also must assume that this data is also shared with the NSA. But this is only the beginning Microsoft for example also has source code sharing arrangements with the PLA and FSB. This gives these agencies a massive advantage in the design of spying malware. Ever wonder what the real origin of all the Chinese hacking allegations is?

If this is not enough consider the  recent Lenovo / Superfish incident. To make a long story short, Lenovo partnered with Superfish to break SSL connections on certain Microsoft Windows laptops they sold in order to insert ads into SSL connections. This was accomplished by placing a fake certificate into the trusted root of the computer during the manufacturing process. The net result is that anyone with the password to the fake certificate, komodia, could decrypt the SSL connection and for example steal login credentials, empty people's bank accounts, place malware to steal crypto - currency etc. Komodia is by the way the name of a company with ties to the Mossad that was involved in the development of the spying software. Microsoft is not an innocent bystander here, since they tightly control how computers with Microsoft Windows are distributed and sold.

If one is truly serious about privacy and security one must avoid propriety operating systems particularly those from Microsoft and Apple. In practice for many people this means GNU/Linux on desktop / laptop and rooted Android on mobile.

As much as many here are critical of DRK and with good reason, on the issue of giving GNU/Linux preference over Microsoft Windows the DRK developers deserve praise rather than criticism.

Edit: smooth's comments on the commercial incentives for the DRK masternodes to sell data for profit are right on the money.

I believe there could be a good market for the puts after reading this post. This does not mean I would recommend purchasing them.  

I have zero sympathy here. Those who choose propriety DRM and malware infected operating systems sold licensed by large multinational monopolies such as Microsoft and Apple need to learn that by their choice of operating systems they are cutting themselves off from many extremely profitable opportunities. This is especially the case when dealing with crypto - currencies that by their very nature rely on FLOSS and computing devices under their owner's sole control for their security. My own personal experience was purchasing XBT in the 2 -6 USD range in late 2011/2012. Many of those XBT were subsequently sold at an 10000% profit for XMR after Apple gave the iSheep permission to purchase XBT. I am a strong critic of DRK and believe the coin is fundamentally flawed at a structural level; however one thing the DRK developers got right is releasing the mining software on GNU/Linux ahead of Microsoft Windows. There are many valid security reasons why one would do that. Furthermore this also sends a clear message that if one wants privacy one should not be using DRM and malware infected propriety operating systems, where the vendors have, in addition to the DRM and malware risk, made data sharing arrangements with multiple national spy agencies.