No need to fear Bitcoin if you are governing your people right and isolating those who refuse to do right. Otherwise what is meant for good would be used by the lawless.
It's like fire, it's meant for good and could be misused if members of your society become darkened by evil around them. So, you fear they would misuse things they can access such as fire, or use them to attack other people or society. The fire on its own is not the problem but the evil that has been allowed to spread among the people which makes them to misuse things. If you ban fire, it won't stop them from making fire from rocks when they need to cook or attack, or they will still find other ways to attack because the evil in them rather than fire  wants them to do wrong. . Besides, it would be foolish to ban fire rather than stop evil from spread in the society.. If people are lead morally, they will know the right way to use the fire and will see no reason to attack with it. And the society would be peaceful.


Bitcoin is meant for good. It's a technology built with the right principles for the benefit of society. It has become one of the sources of income and investment for many people all over the world. And it's really doing well for them in that regard, even though it was created as a system independent of the world's economy. It does not seem to need the world as it can thrive on its own system, but the world seems to desire it because of how well it's built and has become
Banning it won't stop people from being lawless
The evil in people which spreads like disease is what makes them to be lawless. National administrators should try to stop evil from spreading in society rather than banning harmless Bitcoin.

No need to fear Bitcoin if you are governing your people right and isolating those who refuse to do right. Otherwise what is meant for good would be used by the lawless.
It's like fire, it's meant for good and could be misused if members of your society become darken by evil around them. So, you fear they would misuse things around them such as fire, or use it to attack other people or society. The fire on its own is not the problem but the evil that has been allowed to spread among the people which make them to misuse things. If you ban fire, it won't stop them from making fire from rocks when they need to cook or attack, or they will still find other ways to attack because the evil in them rather than fire  wants them to do wrong. . Besides, it would be foolish to ban fire rather than stop evil from spread in the society.. If people are lead morally, they will know the right way to use the fire and will see no reason to attack with it.


Bitcoin is meant for good. It's a technology built with the right principles for the benefit of society. It has become one of sources of income and investment for many people all over the world. And it's really doing well for them in that regard, even though it was created as a system independent of the world's economy. It does not seem to need the world as it can thrive on its own system, but the world seems to desire it because of how well it's built and has become
Banning it won't stop people from being lawless
The evil in people which spreads like disease is what makes them to be lawless. National administrators should try to stop evil from spreading in society rather than banning harmless Bitcoin.

Has nothing to do with decentralized wallets, even though they may be included in the writeup, unless they are designed through open community consensus to automatically refuse serving certain addresses.  There is no way to directly impose centralized rules on coins controlled by their holders/owners. . They will likely be doing that on exchanges/wallets they control (which will be centralized) so that tainted coins that go through them are affected
Non-custodial  or decentralized wallets do not control your coins, you control them. You only use the wallets to mostly view, send  or receive bitcoins. Centralized powers have no such authority, control or power over bitcoins controlled by their holders/owners, because they go against multiple principles/rules of the Bitcoin system, such as decentralization of power, trustlessness, transparency, censorship resistant, privacy, etc. These principles are supreme and can't be violated, but they can ofcourse do that on exchanges they control on tagged tainted coins passing through them.
The Bitcoin community should as well be tagging and blacklisting tainted coins, but in transparent and trustless manner. Holders of  such coins should always be given opportunity to prove their innocence. We can't behave like the centralized and opaque powers who always seem desperate and don't care much about people being innocent.
* A coin becomes tainted when it's acquired or earned through immoral means. This should be the focus of the blacklisters, whether humans or AI, and they should be open to checks and balances so that this is not abused.

If you fully serve money(or the entity) you become rich in the matrix, while in the right system money serves you or you have power over it.
The rich in the matrix are typically loyal to the system and do what it demands from them, and their businesses will be well supported. You have to support the agenda of the system or build your products in a particular way that ensures that the system is in control. To continue to climb up the ladder of riches,  you have to keep supporting the system and/or satisfying the evil lust of society/people, not minding the bad consequences or the fact that people become slaves to those evil things. For those who still have some "conscious" there is a point where they refuse to keep climbing further, and then they will remain where they are or be removed from the position.

The rich people at the right side completely stick to doing what is right for consumers. They will not look rich or have alots riches to themselves, but their uprightness earn them rewards from above. The rewards include power over riches.

I would call that a showoff to intimidate the actual world power which I wouldn't want to mention here.
What determines power is influence. In the system of bondage, China remains below the west and she is nowhere to be found in the System of the Free. In the latter system Russia is at the top, and the one who is at the top on this system rules over those in the system of bondage. Weapons are deceptive and do not actually win war. What wins is your influence above others. And the Word of Mouth becomes the weapon where influences determines strength.
If Russia for example sticks to using her influence correctly, there will be no need for physical weapons. She will just focus more on consistent use of superior wisdom and command over her sphere of influence.

Fixing or limiting supply of a cryptocurrency isn't enough for its continuous price increase. It's about the good and strong principles governing the cryptocurrency that won't be easily violated. Plus the awareness of what you can create or do with the cryptocurrency under the protection of the good principles makes it even more valuable.

It's like valuing a country so much because of the good law governing it that can't be easily broken.  You are willing to pay high price to invest in the country no matter how small the investment is as it's almost certain that there won't be bad policy changes that negatively affects the investment, and you can rest your mind and focus on the development of the country, if it's not very developed. If something changes against you, you are almost guaranteed to get justice.  
Compare that to a country with unfavorable law that the administrators can change or use against you whenever they want. No matter how attractive the country is made to look, you won't be convinced. You may only be willing to pay less even if so much can be done on the country.

Bitcoin is more attractive due to its strong principles that are hardcoded into its system and very difficult to change. The principles combined are more important in the valuation than just the supply limit. If one or more are broken it won't be valued as much. By the way, the more its valued, the higher the price

Confirmation or verification is a very important principle of the Bitcoin system. It can be categorized under trustlessness which is basically not trusting a transaction until it's confirmed or verified by multiple nodes (to prevent fraud or things like double-spending), unlike centralized system that would typically require single verification. So, once confirmed, it's fully approved.

There could only be a faster and safe way of doing it.  Maybe by having very fast and consistently accurate fewer nodes to do the verification while other nodes (esp equally faster ones) watch them to detect and prevent wrong approvals.
 Or probably have special contract address that receiver's address would accept immediately (on one confirmation) when detected because the contract will sort gurantee the receiver that he is certainly getting paid, and that the fund could even be resent if rejected by the network.
We could also use a very fast auxiliary chain that is more acceptable to the Bitcoin Network.

Don't marry people that are not meant for you. Before we were born our CREATOR already destined us to be with certain people as husbands and wives, but people try to marry (or marry) someone else or at the wrong time. Always wait for the right person and the right time.
Our CREATOR's Will rather than human will should always prevail.

Things like that is typically allowed to happen to people or animals on the wrong side and on a mission to attack the innocent victim. In that case the victim or his/her protector uses lethal force against the attacker.

It could also happen if the the one on the wrong posses a serious security threat to the victim and is determined to cause serious harm to him/her.

Nevertheless, there should always be chance given to such people to surrender. And non-lethal attack that is very likely to effectively disable the potential attacker should be used first

It's more about non-restrictive usage than equality. No one has the right to stop you from using Bitcoin the way you want as long as it isn't for evil purposes.

Your good contribution or investment should be according to your ability, or what you can afford or wish to contribute. And your reward would be according to your contribution. Nevertheless that doesn't make you lesser or higher than others when it comes to doing the right things, or adhering to the principles/rules that govern the Bitcoin system.

He isn't the only wealthy person to attempt what you think he's trying to attempt. He is not tougher than the one who currently owns Twitter, and who is more careful crossing redlines.

It's waste of money working outside of what is allowed for Bitcoin. There will  definitely be no success unless it's within the Bitcoin principles. The centralized powers can only do what they are allowed to do especially with regards to bitcoins in their custody, and as long as no attempt to touch or hijack the Bitcoin system

Bitcoin is special.

A truely decentralized system like Bitcoin is built to serve the interest of everyone within the decentralization boundary otherwise it become limited to special interests who contribute to its centralization since no one else but people like them enjoy one or more of its useful features. Bitcoin is consider a fair system because it's easier to run and could be run by majority of users if they could afford common things like fast internet connection, enough data to access the internet and standard laptop/pc,  Interestingly Bitcoin is the oldest cryptocurrency but remains one of the easiest to run. .

 Everyone won't be able to afford high fee if the network is congested, and running a node becomes harder for most users when the size of the data that is regularly validated and added to the chain inreases drastically. It's important to keep the data as light as possible to keep the system fair for most or all users

 Besides, this s why Bitcoin is considered a fair system unlike many cryptocurrencies in existence that have restricted full participation with certain features

One of the main reasons certain people/things would want things like ordinals into system is to bloat and centralized the chain, making it harder to run. That's a kind of attack vector that must be checked always. Lots of data like that belongs to things like sidechains

If people want to see more customers buying things from them with Bitcoin, they could find or create a proper global but localized marketplace for that. The marketplace should be transparent and organized for mutual exchange of products and services both online and offline, with peers.

You search for local products/services and buy them from the sellers, the marketplace algorithm will inturn recommend your products/services to them (your customers, the sellers) when they search to buy them on the marketplace. If they buy from you, you could keep buying from them, and that becomes mutual and an incentive for many local buyers and sellers to join the marketplace since there are high chances of their products/services getting bought by people they buy things from.

Even though the algorithm will encourage mutual exchange of goods and services, high reputation and high quality services will be priorized such that if you don't find the quality you want from a mutual customer a better quality mutual customer will be recommended, otherwise you get a non-mutual customer for the desired quality.
Not withstanding, a mutual trade will always be top at the algorithm priority list which could encourage mutual traders to improve on quality to get  recommended more to buyers, more than non mutual customers

Ofcourse that's what proper Bitcoin sidechains would solve. A Nation or community could have their own sidechain with Bitcoin pegs, for local or global usage. Should be possible to detach the chain from the rest of the Bitcoin Network and use it on local internet or even offline. They can always rejoin the rest of the global networks to exchange the pegged bitcoins for bitcoins.
It's important to have a robust auxiliary Bitcoin sidechain Network that is according to the principles of main Bitcoin Network.
The auxiliary network should be completely decentralized with no point of failure or centralization such that when service providers for example continuously vanish from the network, others will automatically and always take their places and continue to render the services. And there should be zero of chance of having coins locked somewhere and not released because the service providers are nolonger available or they lost their keys. One of the viable solutions to this is to allow anyone regardless of the economic statues to provide this services by having stablecoins that sort of back the bitcoins that users would be sending to the addresses they control on the mainchain. If they vanish with the bitcoins, the backed stablecoins can always be paid to the users. Besides the stablecoins could be earning interest as incentives while locked on the auxiliary network.

That scenario is very unlikely, but assuming it happens there will most likely be people, businesses, nodes, wallets, internet cafe, etc that manage to stay online maybe via satellite or other special means. They stay connected globally while private local devices connect to them, mostly to access their wallets.

If international or global internet does not exist atall at that period, permissionless intranet or local/national Bitcoin networks of nodes and others would form around the world. But the most trustworthy and reliable networks from one or few places would be connected to by people from other countries via SMS, radio link, etc. I think reliable Bitcoin companies or organizations will be responsible for facilitating secure transactions between them and the individuals from other countries.

Maybe they were wrong or harmed by certain parts of the heritage and that can act as reminder or become a provocation.
This is why in everything we do, we do it fairly and not wrong anyone. The victim of the wrong deed could bear longlasting grudges, and the wrong deed can be used against the wrong doer in the future... Even the enemy can take advantage of this and constantly remind the victim to keep the parties involved divided. Or there could be false representation of true history to achieve thesame goal.
But if evil doer was justly punished in the past and the intention of the punisher was good, the proof will be in the good outcome, and it will be hard to erased or hide. This can be used as evidence why justice was done in the past. But everything should be done morally or with good intentions rather than in hurtful prideful or provocative ways. Otherwise that become loopholes for the enemy to take advantage of to keep both divided and weak.

Before you have power over others you have to be qualified, otherwise, like less upright kid guiding more upright adults, you'll lead those above you into problems. Besides, the leaders or presidents you see today were made leaders(or allowed to be leaders) by our CREATOR. They were given the power, which in most cases are approved by the people they lead because they seem better or more capable than they are.

The issue with Russia/Ukraine or Israel/Palestine is a problem of people rebelling or refusing to obey higher power or the
more righteous ones (which usually translate to more power) with better understanding and judgements. In this case the high power will try to exercise his authority by force which becomes a prove to the rebels that he's actually higher in power and supposed to be obeyed or taken seriously.

Part of the strong security advantage of decentralized or non-custodial platforms is the ability to hold your keys for as long as possible, without worrying about exchange hacks or shut down... As long as Bitcoin still exist, you can always access your coins with your keys. But it's not the case with centralized or custodial managements. Many old exchanges have shutdown with users struggling or unable to recover their coins.

Another security advantage of selfcustody is that your biometrics data or private/sensitive info is not reveal to strangers who may do whatever they want with it.

*It's important to have multiple copies of your private keys saved in safe locations, and it won't easily get lost without one or more backups.

Excerpt from Wikipedia on the democratic referendum by Crimea to join Russia

Majority of people from Donbas voted to join Russia too. This is about a legitimate right to be free from injustice and oppressive forces not about so called rare earth

Coup against the then Ukrainian President who is probably from Donbas was part of the root causes of Russia intervention in the regions and Ukraine, rather than so called rare earth metals. Crimea decided to become part of Russia through democratic referendum after the coup, and Donbas was subsequently attacked by Ukraine, and then began a war between Donbas and Ukraine before Russia finally intervened in 2022 to protect donbass and others. Had Russia provoked the coup and the war against Donbas then the whole thing would look suspicious. But it wasn't provoked by Russia which means Russia likely never anticipated having Donbas and others under her protection. It was coup which was done for the purpose of full capture of Ukraine by pro western forces.

As far as I can tell there were attempts to address the issue between donbass and Ukraine, with Russia and others acting as mediators, but recommendations such a decentralization of control of donbas was not implemented. That would have given Donbas some degree of autonomy or independence from Ukraine.



The West Africa coups were as a result of weakening influence of West in the region and the escalation of security issues. It was actually predicted to happen due to the weakening influence. The stronger power which was Russia had to help after the new West African leaders sought for her help against the terrorism issues in the region and the west.


Trump interest in Greenland was mainly due to growing presence of China, and to some extent Russia.


And USA deal with Ukraine for the resource was a compensation for the hugh free money and military assistant given to Ukraine for the the unprofitable war with Russia.


The primary reasons for the world issues you highlighted are not rare metals but the issue of injustice, rejection of hostile/immoral foreign influence, insecurity,etc.
Natural resource such as rare metals can be found everywhere on Earth. They could aswell be blamed for the cause of such crisis in any part of the world