[edited out]
Karartma1, I don't think you need to abandon ship. Let's wait and see how this plays out. It's all good to have total freedom to do whatever we want, but do you remember how Elwar's seastead ended up? We've got to tread carefully, or my statement "we'll end up filthy rich, but unable to enjoy our riches" may come true.
For sure, if we are feeling overexposed to bitcoin, maybe we cut back on our allocation a bit.
But, even with various negative news like this, it remains difficult to figure out where to better put your money, and even if there might be some justifications, based on recent news, how to better allocate.
Of course, each person has to decide for themselves the extent to which they might be over-allocated in bitcoin, and also if s/he might become a target of governmental actions and/or overreach based on his/her own situation - whether that is being accused of some conduct that s/he did not consider to be against the law.. but sometimes safety measures may well need to be taken in regards to where to hold stash and how much of the private keys are kept off line. I personally find it can be quite difficult to attempt to sell BTC directly, especially if we start to get to very large numbers, in the future, so in that regard, it is likely better to have some arrangements with traditional institutions to be able to have avenues to liquidate portions of your BTC stash from time to time and also reporting on taxes, consulting with attorneys and accountants and things like that could be helpful too.
If any of us are pulling out anything approaching fuck you status levels, whether that is a million or more or even in the territory of $6million or more, then we may well need to have some of those liquidation relationships because it could be much more difficult to operate peer to peer with those kinds of quantities, and then might we be interacting in circles that might end up causing questions to our own actions, too - even if we personally believe that we are trying to stay above board with every one of our actions.
I seriously worry about being able to "cash out" when "fuck you" rich. I fear that, by that time, all the cameras, guns, machetes, rusty pipes and what have you, will be pointing at us HoDLers, even going so far as to label us criminals, DPR v.2 (or is it v.3?), or some other "guilty-until-proven-innocent" accusation. It all depends on how "accepted" Bitcoin will be at that point. And, as you know, timescales in Bitcoin time are very short, meaning that we'll know quite soon. It's all good to imagine an ideal world where TPTB have accepted and even endorsed Bitcoin, but I don't think this will be an easy battle. We may win, but there will be blood.
Of course this "cashing out" may not even be necessary, if things play out in Bitcoin's favour, and BTC (or satoshi, or whatever fraction of a satoshi results from a 2nd layer solution, should 1 BTC > $1M) ends up being usable in buying everyday goods and services. This would be an ideal situation, in which BTC's intrinsic value stays in the BTC realm and we directly use it to survive (food, shelter, Lambos, hookers, blow, the usual necessities). But, somehow, I don't think it will be that easy. Not when the establishment sees their power taken away. They won't surrender without a fight.
My advice is to be prepared for any possible outcome. Personally, I'm more exposed to BTC than I am to more traditional investments, but I can surely survive (and ever enjoy the occasional little pleasures—but nowhere near "fuck you" rich status) without touching my BTC. I just follow the "invest what you can afford to lose" motto, while at the same time supporting and firmly believing that Bitcoin will succeed.
In short, as Bitcoin's value is rising, my feelings are bittersweet. Sweeter than bitter, of course, but there's always that aftertaste you get when chewing a dirty piece of paper...
Ok. I watched that clip.
How come when they left, they did not take the briefcase with them?
Am I missing something? By the way, I had never seen the whole movie, so surely I must be missing something about the meaning of that briefcase.
Also, why was the one cowering black kid spared? Travolta's character goes up to him in the end of the clip, and he asked why they were not told about the guy with the BIG gun who was hiding in the bathroom, and the kid does not answer - yet he was spared.
The briefcase is an enigmatic element of the movie, that is open to interpretation. I won't give you mine, since you haven't watched it yet. But you should. I'm a big fan of Quentin Tarantino, so my opinion is surely biased, but I do consider it one of the greatest movies of all time. The first time I watched it was with my (then) girlfriend, back in 1994. She hated it, and we even had a somewhat heated discussion about it. Could it be more appealing to guys than girls?
As for the kid being spared, my guess is that it's Samuel Jackson's way of thanking God for His "divine intervention" which saved their lives.
BTW, the scene whose YouTube clip I linked to, is not a continuous scene. In the actual movie, it's split and its parts are shown at different times. The YouTube poster has joined them together in one continuous clip.
Another thing that will probably be irrelevant to most, is that Tarantino is a hardcore film fan, and insists on shooting his films on real film (no digital cameras involved). A true cinema lover, in its original media, with all its quirks that give true movies that special appeal.
Edit: Corrected typo.