I think it is very strange too.

First of all why would China let bitcoin get so far before waving the ban hammer around. It's not like any of the bitcoin companies are independent of government elements anyway.

Secondly, why do it in two goes. First they banned banks and financial institutes from dealing in bitcoins, then they banned 3rd party payment processors from dealing with exchanges, two weeks after the first ban.

Thirdly, it's sounds to me like these decisions are all made by the PBOC, haphazardly, It just feels to me like the central bank and the state are not taking the same stance on bitcoin.  It feels like the bankers are trying to protect their interests while the people want bitcoin.

complete waste of money. if he's got that much he should buy bitcoins maybe next week and hold

Well because it's a bitcoin miner, silly.  

It's just false positives, but as for the infected browser one, you might want to run a thorough scan for that. I've received false positives from the miner from AVs, but never for browsers.

Just checked with my wife - basically it is not clear from the Chinese (and most likely this is on purpose).

hence the constant outcry from civil libertarians about asset forfeiture laws. they are unconstitutional and unethical.

no, legally they dont have to do a criminal forfeiture. they can file for forfeiture civilly without conviction. but that is unlikely to happen.

Playing devils advocate here.

It's been bothering me lately, thinking about this. Consumers have absolutely no motivation to use Bitcoin. And because of that, I don't understand how it will ever go global.

All the motivation is for merchants. They avoid merchant fees. They get no chargebacks.  But they're also going to get no sales (aside from enthusiasts), because consumers have no incentive to use it, whatsoever.

Where are the perks for consumers, in a situation where they're buying something with bitcoin?

The only benefit Bitcoin brings to consumers, is money transfers. People who send money Home to their families in other countries. Bitcoin will corner the market that Western Union currently dominates. And probably put it out of business. While that is a huge industry, it's a fraction of how big Bitcoin could become if consumers used it for purchasing.

What incentive do consumers have to use Bitcoin at all? None. And because of that, it's never going to be adopted worldwide. Again, playing devils advocate here. I want to hear people's responses to this. Because in my mind, it seems to be true. And that is depressing.

You may say, it's just like cash, what motivation do people have to use cash. Or it adds a level of privacy. But these aren't significant enough benefits for a worldwide paradigm change. We're talking about adopting a new paradigm here. There needs to be incentive, for people to even bother making a huge change like this. Especially when it's more difficult than cash. More confusing than cash. More ugly than cash, requiring people to understand several decimal place fractions and other complicated things. So not only is there zero incentive to use it, but there are several reasons why they wouldn't.

There needs to be something huge, global, significant, about Bitcoin that will motivate people who buy things to say "Forget this silly cash! Forget my credit cards!"

Tell me why this is wrong. Please.

An offer of 250.000 € was also not enough for them. But in the light of the security breach plus user passwords hashed only unsecurely is definitely not worth it. Also every day the site is down will just decrease the value as users are moving elsewhere.