Does it matter on the type of person for implementing it? As long as its been implemented properly, and securely, it shouldn't matter. As you probably know, a lot of programmers rely on libraries, and basically copy, and paste code to make a functional product. I find lazy has a negative stigma around it, but in terms of programming, and copying code that has already been proven to work, and of course you're allowed to do so, I don't see that as the negative lazy, but rather efficient.

This is my takeaway from this. Just because Proton mail uses a similar system to Bitcoin seeds, doesn't mean a user should use the same words as their recovery seed of their wallet. Obviously, this is basic security, but I bet a lot of people aren't going to heed that advice.

Though, I haven't checked whether the words correspond to the words that Bitcoin wallets use, which if they don't is probably a better idea, and was probably purposely implemented that way by the developers to avoid this sort of issue.

Brave bet. The best result I see Tottenham getting is a draw. Manchester City haven't been lighting the league on fire as of recent though, and I've talked about their frailties before, so who knows. I just can't personally see it since Tottenham have been rather inconsistent too. If anything though, and I was going to put a bet on someone scoring it would have to be Son. Tottenham will be looking to counter attack Manchester City who will likely dominate the ball, like they have done in every game this season. Son being quicker will likely run beyond Kane, who will likely hold the ball up, and look to lay it off.

I'd actually be willing to put a bet down for either a 0-0 draw or 1-1 just because of the odds it'll generate, and the fact I think Tottenham will be looking to sit back, and invite pressure while looking for the counter. Manchester City have struggled to score at times, which sounds odd when they've literally just beaten teams by 3+ goals, but that wasn't without a element of luck sprinkled in.

There's a difference between a unknown risk, and a known risk. For example, if you bet on a sports team to win a match, you know there's three different outcomes, they win, they draw or they lose. There aren't any other outcomes, and you know this as a matter of fact.

However, as you suggested blindly trusting companies because there is a element of risk to gambling, unknown risks fall into the category of not knowing whether something is legit or not. This, when it can be proven isn't acceptable. Every gambling company that could implement a provably fair system, should. End of argument, since this should be factored into their costs when opening that game. Therefore, this should be done for every new instance of a game. In fact, I think the gambling commissions should be taking a look at this, and only approving licenses if every game they offer that should, and could be provably fair. I'd say it's in their best interests to vet services for provably fair systems.

So, while you're partially correct that there's an element of risk associated with gambling, hence the definition of gambling, these two examples given aren't the same risk. One is acceptable, and the other isn't or at the very least shouldn't be.

You'll find that the more technical people will avoid anti viruses for the reasons I mentioned above. I actually see anti viruses to be more tailored towards those that don't know much about computers or using them safely. For example, and I do hate giving this an an example as it comes across as stereotypical, but it's not meant to be that way; a older generation person that hasn't had much interest in computers, will likely be more inclined to use anti virus because they don't have the knowledge to secure themselves. However, while there's nothing wrong with this approach, there's definitely a element of risk here, since that person will likely assume that they're safe from all attacks, and therefore will be more complacent, when in fact they aren't completely secure.

Your data is 100 percent going to be leaked at some point, if it hasn't already been so. This is nothing to do with your personal security (although you can mitigate it by providing fake/temporary data), but the services that you use. For example, the most popular websites in the world have been hacked, and have had their data leaked. This forum has been hacked, and user's passwords, and other information was leaked. So, avoiding leaks is impossible if you use the internet, and sign up to services.

However, like I briefly mentioned you can mitigate that risk by providing fake or temporary data that is website/service specific. Although, most people don't do this because of the issue with convenience.

The thing is, with all the claims I've seen I've never seen any statistics which could actually be reliable. They're all using assumed data, which when you consider null hypothesis, isn't valid. So, for me to be convinced that Bitcoin mining is a problem, more so to the environment when you compare the other fossil fueled industries, that's when I'll take notice, and propose change. However, that has yet to be proven.

The thing is, I would likely acknowledge that Bitcoin is using a lot of power, after all Proof Of Work is designed that way, however that assumption is meaningless until I actually have data to back it up, without the data, and research which has been conducted properly its hard to justify change when you don't know all of the facts.

I will still advocate that we should be looking to be as clean as possible when mining, however I can't state how urgent or even how important this is, since I don't have the data neither does anyone else. I'm pretty certain gathering accurate data for this would be nearly impossible. Now, that doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking to make a change, but its annoying to see Bitcoin get this reputation, when I can almost guarantee there was other general consumer products that everyone uses everyday, which are both worse in power consumption, and probably could be improved upon.

Also, CoinShares research isn't exactly that reliable, since they're estimating. Yet, as we know with something as unknown, and complex as this issue, the accuracy of such as estimate might well be painting a completely different picture at each end of the allowable range. Also, CoinShare's research could be considered somewhat bias due to the their involvement with Cryptocurrency.

I'd like to see some proper research conducted from a neutral researcher, with as much transparency as possible. Although, I'm afraid it still won't be enough, because it'll end up being estimates rather than actual data we can rely on.

The only argument I have for Bitcoin miners, and improving their energy consumption is; they will somewhat rely on the government improving their energy reserves, since most will be drawing off state assets, or it's within their best interests to reduce the cost of electricity so they profit more. Whereas, other industries that might actually not be as feasible or beneficial.

Ideally, physically or using a operating system which supports compartmentalization, therefore isolating it from your daily activities is the best approach. I'm an advocate for Qubes OS which not only isolates each qube from another i.e instances of a operating system, it can optionally isolate your network from them too. There's also options to have a disposable sys-net, which upon rebooting resets it back to the template, so if you did get compromised it would only be for that session.

Although, even without isolation techniques, you can avoid most problems by not downloading anything that you haven't verified to be legitimate.

I actually consider anti viruses to be worse than just following basic security protocols. They slow down your computer, they often come with bloatware, and they're intrusive via unnecessary notifications. Also, some people have claimed they falsely identify problems, just so you think they're working.

An Anti Virus is a glorified database checker, they don't use anything impressive, and they aren't effective against new attacks, until they've been found, and put in the database. This often nulls people into a false sense of security. So, are anti viruses beneficial? Probably to some people, but like I suggested above you can easily avoid most of the pitfalls by not doing risky stuff on your computer.

This is probably the least confident I've been in a Welsh side for years, although I have a feeling that we'll turn up for the English game no matter what our current form is, as we always manage to do that. The Scottish game had some good spells, but I couldn't help, but think that Scotland probably were the better attacking side. Wales have a good defense for the most part, however they really do lack in creative flair going forward. We'll need to sort that out if we are going to finish in a respectable position in this years Six Nations.

I thought Russel's sin bin was justified, and the right decision, but I do believe the decision in the dying minutes of the game to not yellow card us for a clear shoulder to head tackle, was wrong. I didn't think there was enough mitigating factors there to downgrade it to just a penalty. I thought it was at least a yellow, and could have potentially been a red on another day.

I've got Ireland winning the Six Nations this year. Runners up will probably be France, and then the next spot will either be Scotland or Wales. You could say I've got a bias against England there, but I just think Ireland, France will beat them, they've already lost against Scotland, and I will always fancy our chances against England due to the nature of the rivalry.

Not going to lie, when I initially read the title, I thought someone actually incorporated the Monopoly game into gambling, which would have definitely piqued my interest, as I quite like a game of Monopoly from time to time.

Yeah, having a gambling license or being a registered company doesn't automatically mean they're trustworthy or legitimate in how they deploy their games. The only way that's acceptable is being provably fair, and any gambling website worth their weight, will spend the extra money in implementing this, because they know they'll get extra customers from it, as well as solidify their reputation.

Any game which is online, and doesn't have a clear logic behind the house edge or fairness, should be provably fair. I'm personally not into slots, and mini games like this, as I prefer sports betting, but I would absolutely not use anything that doesn't prove that behind the scenes nothing untoward is going on.

The guy knows how to market himself well, introducing the shoey which has definitely made him popular among fans, and the guy has started to consistency deliver. I was hoping for a Tuivasa win, however it's not like I was actually expecting it. I know how dangerous Derrick Lewis is, and he's probably the scariest in terms of knock out power, and I'm including Ngannou in that. Ngannou can be avoided quite easily if you look at some of his fights, the recent fight with Gane demonstrated he can be out maneuvered in terms of his punching ability. Though, Derrick knows how to invite pressure, and can counter punch. He's much more technical.

Curtis Blaydes or Stipe would be a nice one for Tuivasa next, I think they also make the most sense. I like Ngannou, and if he stays in the UFC I think that's better for the division, but if Tui comes up against him you can bet your money, I'll be putting a lump sum on Tui, and hoping for the best.

Admins are well aware of the limit imposed since it's not a bug, but rather an intended feature, there's a work around as you put it, in the form of whitelisting users, though this isn't done often. I'm not hundred percent sure if whitelisting reduces search time though, although it practically reduces most other wait times, so I imagine it does.

You could request to be whitelisted, though like I said unlikely for most users.

I'm not going to get into the conspiracy theories here, as I don't think they have much merit. Although, I think your initial point about merit being a contributing factor to certain users voting, is probably a decent enough assumption to make. Perhaps in future Community Awards, merit could be turned off on the thread.

Although, it's not like the Community Awards is something that's truly meaningful, I see it as a community organised event to give recognition to those that have contributed somewhat positively to the forum. Nothing more than that really. So, in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter all that much. Though, as I said the only way you'd combat this is by not allowing merit to be sent in the thread, which I doubt theymos will do, because ultimately it's a drop in the ocean. Adding a prize to the equation likely has motivated certain users to merit, but that would be hard to prove.

Well, if you believe Bitcoin is going to rise in the future, and continue to do so, surely investing anything into it would be a good idea, no? At least that way you're likely benefiting from it, and to be honest you'll probably benefit more by investing into Bitcoin, than you would by gathering interest in a bank.

If history repeats itself, or even follows it at a much less drastic way, you'll still make a tidy profit on it. No one can tell you if it's the right choice for you, however most users here will tell you they have a good outlook on Bitcoin in the long term. If you can hold it through the turbulent times, then in most users eyes you'll be laughing as, and when you take it out.

It was a hard night for me because I'm a fan of both of them. The only fighter I really didn't want to lose on the night was bam bam, who obviously pulled out that insane elbow knockout against one of the most deadly knockout artists in the game. I had a bet relying on Adesanya which netted me a nice profit. Like I said the previous week it was a x52 accumulator which came in, though I wouldn't have minded Bobby taking it honestly. He worked hard, looked ten times better than he did in the previous fight, and honestly I thought he did enough on the night.

I imagine we see these two fight again, there's not a awful amount of other fighters that can challenge the two. I quite liked Bobby's quote at the end of the fight, where he basically said him, and Adesanya are the best, and we all know it. He put it in a much more elegant way than that though, which is quite impressive considering he did take some heavy knocks in that fight. Especially the earlier rounds.

Yeah, I have a habit of doing incredibly long odd accumulators which never come in. Think the most I've actually won is 1k. I seriously thought Aston Villa were going to make it look easy, not just win. Although, I didn't watch the game since Liverpool were on at the same time, I was somewhat following a live commentary, and I saw that there was multiple factors which slowed the game down. Plus, the goal they conceded was a deflection, so overall not a great day.

At the end of the day my view point is I gamble occasionally for fun, I don't do it expecting to win, I do it for incredibly long odds, which if they did come in could potentially be life changing. Seriously, I've had accumulators go up to the millions, obviously never came in, but I tried .

Though, these days I usually do bet builder accumulators, so not every gambling website allows that, so I've been forced to use fiat accepting ones since they have the best variety.

I do believe I remember seeing them say they have a way of handling mass amount of reports, though don't quote me on that.

Yeah, if your a frequent patrol visitor you'll see them pop up every so often. They're mostly a non problem, since the bot handles them quickly. Though, there's a element of risk still for users visiting, and potentially downloading it, so I don't think it's too much of a problem reporting them. Like I said, I sometimes get rid of them before the bot does, though at Mitchell suggests they seem to come in fits, and starts so once they begin they'll continue for a while, and then die down.

Do you recall how long this has been going on for? I believe its been over a year since they started, but I think I might be grossly understating that too.

The thing is, the majority of people are malnourished. I think this is partly because of lack of knowledge, however I also believe its because of how modern life is. For example, we wasn't really designed to work eight to ten hour shifts every day, in fact there's plenty of research going into how biphasic sleeping patterns could potentially be a benefit to us, since that's likely how we operating before modern living introduced jobs.

It's going to sound a little weird, and it might not be accurate, but I wouldn't be surprised if first world countries have more malnourished in terms of a balanced diet, than those that live in third world countries. Obviously, malnourished is often associated with third world countries, and it's pretty obvious why, however first world countries tend to have awful working hours which means a lot of people skip lunch or don't eat regularly enough, which in turn causes issues with your health. Even if this is a extreme assumption to make, and isn't exactly accurate at least to the degree of first world countries having more malnourished people, I think the vast majority are still malnourished, and this is often down played.

Remember, just because your eating food, doesn't mean you're eating a balanced diet. Calories are what age you, and the majority are eating more calories than they require, and still not getting the benefits they would by eating half of those calories in a more balanced way.

Are you able to provide where this good source was? Would be interested to see how much they're recommending, and to what benefit it would provide. I don't currently supplement vitamin D at all.

These sort of posts are usually handled by MindlessElectron, a bot created, and managed by Mitchell. Although, it only nukes certain posts that fit the criteria, and only from newbies. I assume your talking about the fake PhoenixMiner posts which have been going on for probably more than a year now. I usually leave those posts as the bot usually zaps them within a minute, as you said unless they just happen to pop up as I'm refreshing the patrol page since I can handle them before the bot does. Hopefully that doesn't cause any errors in MindlessElectron from time to time.

I did notice earlier there was a newbie account with over 200 posts than posted one, looks to be handled now. I'm not sure if these are compromised accounts or if they've just built up accounts over time, though most of the accounts are newbies who have either only posted a few lines here, and there or they are without any posts whats so ever.

There's no statistics which are released to the public, other than what can be found on the mod deletion page. You could theoretically monitor that, and get some ball park figures, though it doesn't always include every moderation action, i.e doesn't include moving threads.

There's quite a few users from around the 2018 mark registered in a certain time period that seem to be both distributing these fake PhoniexMiners, but also bump spamming. We must have nuked thousands of these types of accounts over the months, so it's likely that most of the accounts they made themselves, since they seem to always be within a certain time frame in terms of when they registered.

It would be interesting to see how many mod actions are taken each week or month, could probably shock a lot of people. Plenty of moderators here working around the clock, which sometimes feels like an impossible task. Thankfully, we've got a pretty dedicated community in terms of reporting, which I'm personally very grateful for. Seriously, I don't think I've ever seen such a dedicated community in terms of battling malicious users, and spam.

Legally? No. That's life, you have to pay taxes. I know they can sometimes be a pain in the arse, especially how complex they can be sometimes, however at least in the UK our tax goes to something useful like the National Health Service (NHS).

Just pay your taxes, and live stress free. I always recommend an accountant, and I know what I lot of people will say, that goes against Bitcoin's core principles in trying to avoid third parties, however I like to have peace of mind that my accountant has run all the numbers, and I don't have to second guess myself if I were to do them myself.

You can however legally put in expenses against your income tax. So, if you've bought a computer which you needed to earn that Bitcoin, you could potentially offset that against your tax. Again, an accountant will be able to tell you what you can, and can't offset against the taxes. I usually just send in the receipts, and let them do it automatically, whatever they think is eligible.

Depends on the moderator, as some might not see the benefit of removing older posts which are unlikely to be seen. Although, I can definitely see the logic in that, I usually just handle them anyway, if it's spam, it's spam, and probably needs to be removed.

Plus, a lot of threads have been active for years, especially those in the altcoin section, so those threads are likely viewed by hundreds or thousands of people each week, so it makes sense to clean it up.

Well, we've got a Altcoin section, and that section is one of the more popular ones on the forum. So, saying that this forum is only Bitcoin is more of an elitist attitude, rather than the truth. If you don't like Altcoins or NFT's then that's fine, but the forum has definitely adapted, and the Altcoins section is a contributing factor to the continued success of Bitcointalk. While, I wouldn't say we go as far as relying on it, it definitely contributes positively to the forum, despite some of the apparent spam issues there.

NFT isn't an organisation, rather its a term than covers a wide range of tokens. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of NFT's, but the concept of them has been around a lot longer than recent hype will lead you to believe. However, it's definitely massively hyped right now, even football teams, and organisations as big as the UFC are getting in on the action. So, while I do believe that the hype will die down to a more realistic level, NFT's will probably have some sort of future, even if that is massively reduced when compared with today.