The problem I see in the Craig S. Wright trial: most, if not all of the judges and legal people, generally don't understand (and many don't like) the concept of Bitcoin and its fundamental properties that make it what it is. This lack of knowledge and understanding of Bitcoin by the legal system, combined with some clever tactics of manipulation by the CSW side, can lead to the judge awarding CSW rights on the BTC in the addresses he supposedly owns. This can lead to an avalanche of legal actions and pressure on the Bitcoin Core team to do something that can't even be done. We all saw what happened in the Cøbra case.
CSW is a cancer that is metastasizing to all aspects of Bitcoin's existence and development, with the sole purpose of feeding his ego and satisfying his megalomania. The sooner he disappears from the face of the earth, the better. He has to be hit so hard as to never be able to attack anyone ever again -- just like cancer: cut it out before it spreads.
I am not sure if I get what you are saying, AlcoHoDL.
Isn't CSW merely fitting in a niche that happens to exist.. so even if he disappears from the trying to fuck over bitcoin scene, won't there by some other attack-vector dweeb to take his place as a newly anointed king of dweebs?
Hell, at this rate I'd be happy for a 2k green candle
Patience young padawan.

The bottoms of that last chart come off as somewhat conservative, but I suppose that bottoms do tend to be conservative anyhow... but seeing so much sub $100k bottom projection in 2022 and into 2023 causes me less enthusiasm than seeing tops (even though I have been growing more and more fond of bottom analysis in recent years).
I will note that I can still appreciate the overall chart as still being quite bullish if we would thereafter consider that the projection of the yellow line would likely have some flat in 2023 and then perhaps start to slope UPpity in later 2023..and so at some point our bottom projection would thereafter get permanently above $100k... maybe around late 2024? - early 2025-ish?
Pushing time series extrapolations out that far is pretty speculative.
This stuff is a moving target. Like the way I kind of smushed the lumps under the previous cycles so that the last lump would fit.
This is the transform I used for the cyclical superposition. Fitting all the bumps under bitcoin's price means they all can't be perfect.

I am already personally of the view that once we get into the future, we are merely in the realm of in-perfection anyhow.
Sure, if the data (events) have already happened, then there is a role for some level of perfection striving, but if we are talking about the future, the best would be a range of expectations in which the boundaries of the range would be merely approximations and probabilities because they had not happened yet.. and yeah there would be some kinds of events and data that could be projected in the future in a very certain kind of way, but once involving human behavior, there includes a pretty decently-sized uncertainty element right there.
In other words, sometimes even having lines that project into the future, we seem to frequently find that people will tend to assign them higher value than they deserve merely because they have been drawn out.., even if the drawer of the lines had not intended for those future line locations to have that level of implied concreteness (certainty).