Note if you are already checking arrival of funds via the checktx page, there's a rather simple way you could generate the key image offline for just the output(s) you care about. This would take only a minute or two and not require syncing the chain or restoring a wallet.

I would need to set up the code to do it though. 

Anyone else get a weird message when they try to go to the thread?

There is currently no easy way to do this. However, in the future there might:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/51i0n7/solved_it_hopefully_heres_how_we_can_make_the/

Is the darknet adaption increasing? I've read numbers of around 5% of the vendors accepting XMR on Alphabay.

...
If that seed is at all compromised, and who is to say they can't Patriot Act their way into it, then it can be the perfect Trojan Horse for a continuation of their Surveillance State.

...
3. The volume was/is huge. At first I took it as proof of artificial manipulation, but now it's at least possible the volume is real growth. If so, we are still much behind the equilibrium value.
...

...
An 600 million $ marketcap increase for sure does not mean that there were 600 $ dollar invested in bitcoin .... marketcap = total number of coins * current market price ... an increase in the marketcap is not an indicator of how much new money is invested. (You could say that there is new money, but for sure you could not tell that it is 600 millon $.)

Most in here know that, and you seem to be new in here (from your post count) ... i realy can't understand that noone is explaining that to you, instead they are cheering your numbers, what the hack is wrong with you guys? noone? realy?

Roger Ver is an investor in zcash: https://z.cash/team.html

I disagree. XMR at $30-$50 will see far more "investments" ( compared to the current prices) from the network we are talking about here. They won't see it at the moment, and won't let their network see it (scamcoiners that is). Currently the ones who are getting in know exactly what is going on and what is in store for the future. They are not going to make a splash about it. Roger Ver seems to be an exception to this, and I very much doubt his authenticity as well given that this is a potential conflict of interest. He may be genuinely diversifying but hard to say.

I think it's counter-productive to own so much that it threatens the value of the currency you do hold.  

My original reasoning was invalid, but I used it for lack of a valid alternative:  There are working local currencies in villages as small as ca.  1000 households.  Thus the greatest lower bound on the number of nodes in a viable economy is, to first approximation on evidence, ~1000.  Therefore, No one should own more than 0.1% of emission in the long-run, or there may not be enough nodes.

Not only is this reasoning invalid, it is also obsolete:  There is now a much broader distribution than there was when I formulated the invalid conclusion.  Due to divisibility, it doesn't matter what share of the float the nodes have, so long as the share is distributed appropriately amongst the nodes of the (sub-)economy.

There remain two considerations which I now deem relevant:

I exercise some restraint simply because I don't think it's healthy for adoption if there is a single person who you can point at and say:  He will benefit disproportionately, if I use this currency.  Why should I act to enrich him?  (Although, in my own case, I think I could make a pretty good argument that you should.  Otherwise I wouldn't bother.)  As long as I am among 50 instead of 5, I think I am not doing much positive harm to the economy.  The farther up the Gini curve you go, the more self-defeating it becomes. Maybe you can predate upon a well-developed economy, and continuously improve yourself by impoverishing others, but in a nascent start-up economy, I doubt it can be done, practically speaking.  You have to contribute as best you can, and help insure a constructive, utile distribution, at least until it bootstraps.  My ability to contribute is constrained by available time, so I can't accumulate too much -- otherwise, my harm to distribution will not be adequately offset by my positive contributions in other areas.  How do you calibrate this?  I haven't tried very hard, but I don't really know how, so I just wing it.  Which makes the constraint perhaps a bit too ... flexible ... for perfect, clear (self-interested OR altruistic) rationality.

A separate fuzzy factor which I weigh together with this:  If I were to have owned too much Monero when it was declining, my courage might have failed, or my wife might have ditched me.  Neither would be an acceptable outcome:  I abhor personal cowardice, and I cherish and respect my wife.  But those are personal factors, and highly subjective, although you can work with them rationally, within some limited domains.

Compared to the other coins in the top 15 (excluding ETH, LTC, BTC for a moment) XMR has got the best liquidity as far as I can see.

Now that you mention it, I'm surprised that someone hasn't done that with Gallup's huge swath of polls.

Probabilistic predictions are okay as long as you keep a comprehensive list of all of them. You can then test how many of the "80%" predictions are satisfied relative to the ideal 80%.

The black market alone is estimated to ~650 billion USD.

No one listens to me  even though I am nearly always correct on the markets. How many examples would you need.

No there are a few rational and honest ones, but MasterMined710, specifically, is a dishonest and often incoherent scam protector and pumper.

Details please? Where is the specification for all this stuff? Closed source?

Since 10 February it has maintained near or above the 2% per day gain line.  Running close for a day or so after the recent correction, and just broke to the upside again.  Run little rabbit run!