Oh come on... If you don't like BUSD, you convert it to USDT, send it to Coinbase, and converti it to USDC. It will cost you a few promiles. That is if you don't manage to withdraw USDC before they delist it. Of course it's not nice of Binance to do this, but it is not about stealing assets at all.

A stablecoin war? As far as I can see, Coinbase still lists USDBUSD pair, but even if they delist it it would be insignificant because BUSD is insignificant. However Coinbase and Binance are the two largest exchanges, and Mr. Zhao seems to think that there can be only one!

What would you think of a US leader if he was as liked in Russia as Gorbachev apparently is in the US?

I agree with everything you wrote. However, you did not answer my question. The invasion of 1944 was justified and good, the invasion of Ukraine was bad and evil, fine. But good and legal are not the same, and bad and illegal are not the same. Was there any pre-existing international treaty in 1944 that specified under which conditions an invasion could be considered legal? And is there any international document that says that it is not legal to invade another country against its will? I guess there should be but I don't know which.

Please do. But please have in mind that we are not talking about which invasion is morally justified and which is not. We are talking about legality. Can you point out to a legal act that makes the 1944 invasion legal and the invasion of Ukraine illegal? Maybe there is such a document but I am not aware of it. The legality would have to be established on either both sides or internationally.

You are right. If the invaded country agrees that is legal. But I suspect the the author might not have had a proper definition of legality in mind.

So an invasion can also be legal?

OK but most mainstream media are also not negative any more, with a notable exception of Guardian. They were very negative in 2018, it indeed looked to me like an orchestrated campain to bring the prices down, lead by Davos speaches and The Economist, so the financial elite, the potential buyers. The same sources are at least neutral these days, if not positive. They don't want to turn out stupid again and loose the little credibility that they still have. But of course we remember.

A real transaction is when I want to buy bitcoin so I place a buy order on an exchange, you want to sell it so you place a sell order, and they get matched and executed. A fake transaction is when there is no money changing hands. For instance I open two accounts, I mak sure I pay no real exchange fees (for example I register as a market maker) and I buy and sell bitcoins between these two accounts. No money changed hands but the volume went up. So far I made millions of real orders and about half a million of transactions between cryptocurrencies. None of them was fake.

No. Trades on centralized exchanges are taken care of internally, they do not get written into blockchains and therefore they have nothing to do with the proof of work. They are not the ones that spend that electricity.

"Trade" in this context is a trade between (crypto)currencies. Transfer between private wallets may be such a trade or it may be something else such as a purchase of goods, a loan payback, a gift etc. But the question is not what is the total global trade volume. The question is what is the volume og a single pair on a single centralized exchange. This is what is being faked and transfers between wallets do not and should not enter this calculation.

Very much true.

Trades were never supposed to be and never were in the decentralized ledger and getting rich by trading it was not supposed to be its main bitcoin usage. If it becomes widely used as money some day then you will have it in your wallet on your phone and you will be paying for groceries with it, which will be decentralized. But how you get it is another matter, if you choose to buy it on a centralized exchange that's up to you. There are alternatives but they have their shortcoming.

Sheep need to be sheared. If you see a coin skyrocketing, you don't know the reason and you buy into it, then you deserve to loose your mony in the subsequent dump. Trend following is by far the most common strategy out there. Do what others are doing, and get slotted when others do. If people realize that one can only make money if he does the opposite from what others are doing, markets will suddenly become efficient and it will be very difficult to make any money there.

The negativity is just here on Slashdot. You won't find it on any of the crypto sites. And Slashdot is not a place where someone would conduct a campain for pushing the BTC price down. You know, people get old, they watch those youngsters making millions on bitcoin while they themselves struggle to pay their bills, they get bitter about it and then they hope that bitcoin is going to crash to zero for whatever reason soon. Just like we bitcoiners hope that ethereum will pay soon for dearing to grow more than bitcoin last year. It wasn't supposed to be like that. That's not what they taught us in school.