It is so easy that I am crying to make it accessible for you  


- Buy XMR now at $0.35. Most people can set aside $1,000 so that'll be 3,000 XMR, a rather easy buy even in the illiquid exchange.

- Write it off. Don't care about what you could have bought with it. Work overtime to recoup the money if you must, or skip a trip, to make it emotionally OK that you have given the money away.

- Do some productive stuff, don't follow XMR unless you care about the nascent payment network and services in alpha stage.

- Wait, until it hits $2 (not that hard, we were doing it for months last summer; the ath = $5), if the day arrives, sell 500 XMR and get back 100% of your original investment. If anything, now you should be totally ok to just wait where it goes.

- Continue your life.

- Sell 500 XMR every time it goes up 10x from the previous sale. This way the schedule is:

500 XMR @ $2
500 XMR @ $20
500 XMR @ $200
500 XMR @ $2,000 (gain $1 million)
500 XMR @ $20,000 (gain $10 Mm)
500 XMR @ $200,000 except since at this point you are set for life plus have XMR that is worth 100 million in purchasing power, it's hardly necessary to sell it unless you need something.

$200,000 * 18 million coins = $3,600 billion, still <1% of the current total in USD-denominated assets, so as such, not even a win for crypto but a good start


ADD: Oh forgot to mention: never, EVER:

- sell at a loss
- deviate from the plan in any other way.

I see that as burying one's head 100 feet deep in the sand and laying down a foot-thick concrete slab on top.

Transaction fees did not go up, because most clients were not prepared to upgrade their fees, and replace-by-fee is still not a common practice.  Transactions that paid the standard fee got delayed for many hours.  If the "attackers" had used higher paying transactions,  then hiigher-paying transactions would have been delayed too. 

The "attackers" had intended to spend 5000 euros on the test, but their own BitcoinD servers crashed under the load and so they gave up after spending less than 500 euros.  Even so, the large queues that formed at the nodes crashed Blockchain.info, knocked out bitcoin ATMs, caused problems for BitPay and other services.

The small-blockians have no meaningful technical arguments against the block increase, so they are resorting to personal attacks on Mike and Gavin, and exaggerating the danger of a possible a split of the coin.  Which would never be a real risk if they did not make such a fuss about the increase themselves.

Again, I am each day more convinced that Blockstream had promised to their investors that the network would saturate in a year or two, and then the crowds would come knocking at their door for their Sidechains/LN solutions; and that Blockstream had most of the core devs, so that they could make the changes that they needed to the protocol while blocking any changes that their competitors would need.  That would explain why they were so upset, and why they continue to oppose it when the major players have all agreed to it.

, similar to how it might be years, if ever, before you'll be able to buy 1BTC for $1 again.

Hopefully the FUD being spread by the developers (how I love to say that!  ) will subside, everybody will upgrade to some big-block version, and the fork will be uneventful, with the old branch dead at birth.

But otherwise that is good advice.  If you have coins in an exchange or some other place where you don't have all the private keys, then after the fork you may be able to withdraw only the version of coins that the service owner chose to work with.

Bitcoin has been operating longer than Instagram, Pinterest, Vine, and WhatsApp.

We don't even need to consider whether Gavin has been compromised. He knows there is $billions of VC money depending on Bitcoin growth and he has an implicit fiduciary obligation to make sure Bitcoin scales. Decentralization was already a lost cause any way (gmaxell's delusions about CoinJoin being viable and other tech notwithstanding), so any realistic would realize that you might as well maximize the financial impact of Bitcoin in the mainstream.

The ideological aspects were lost the day v0.1 was released. We don't need to blame Gavin for what even Satoshi admitted he set in stone back on v0.1.

Disclosure: I don't think even if Bitcoin withered on the vine due to defeat of block size increase, that would stop the NWO outcome. Thus that path doesn't aid me at all, because such a non-anonymous store-of-value with such limited security (imagine the hashrate if you pull the plug on VC future) would not be a place I would store my wealth (not that I have any at the moment). I'd much rather see Bitcoin grow so we can use it as a reserve currency of altcoins. I'd much rather see the promotion and hype of crypto-currency grow because it brings more capital to the altcoins too. I'd much rather see all my predictions about Bitcoin-the-NWO-coin be demonstrated.

If you could please spare us from further demonstrates of your miraculous ability to remotely diagnose mental disorders, that would be great.

As for MP's "shtick" versus your own...

I'd rather be MP's cultist than a snotty, pseudo-Freudian, utterly-normative frump like you.  You think you're cool but you are actually just another cultural Marxist parrot repeating the smug groupthink prevalent on Reddit and campus.

MP may be a weirdo or whatever but at least he's not a haughty, preening, typical Austinite snob.

If you insist on buying gluten-free funnel cakes from your favorite food truck using on-chain transactions, do us a favor and instead of Bitcoin use LTC, PPC, XPM, XCN, or DOGE.