It's funny that you quote Armstrong so much in this post about the bull market in BTC because he's been so critical of it. It's obvious from reading his assessments that he only partially understands what it is, which is surprising to me because he's a programmer. For example, he thought that Satoshi would come and claim a "royalty" on Bitcoin now if he was a real person. That's a ludicrous thing to say if you know anything about Satoshi and the history of Bitcoin. He would just spend the likely billions of dollars in BTC he has now and remain anonymous so as not to paint a target on his ass.
That said, most of the rest of what I've read from Armstrong is unbelievably good and his predictions are nearly flawless when it comes to market trends. I have great respect for what he says, because he generally knows his stuff. He's just misinformed about this one subject: cryptocurrency.
There are definitely some areas where he's a bit off, and certain aspects of cryptocurrency certainly apply. However, his historical assessments and "big picture" views tend to be spot on and highly insightful and enlightening. And while I do think he's mostly right on the government-related issues with crypto, such as described in his post "Bitcoin to be Declared a Financial Institution — Beware!" (at the end of the day, they still have all the guns and can do WTF they want)...
Link: Bitcoiners Beware – U.S. Customs Agents Are Coercing for Mobile Passwords
... other points he makes seem to be a bit off, such as this one:
Link: Is Cryptocurrency a Government Plot?