1.  Leclerc 
2.  Leclerc
3.  Verstappen

1.  Andy Ruiz
2.  Over 9.5 Rounds
3.  Round 10

12) Cyril Gane
11) Marvin Vettori
10) Alessio Di Chirico
9) Nasrat Haqparast
8 ) Nathaniel Wood
7) Abus Magomedov
6) Michal Figlak
5) Joaquin Buckley
4) Benoit Saint Denis
3) Khalid Taha
2) Stephanie Egger
1) Jarno Errens
Match 12 Total Strikes: 75 

a) 10  b) 1:49
a) 9  b) 1:30

Game 1:  30'  3-0 Manchester United
Game 2:  30'  2-0 Arsenal
Game 3:  30'  1-0 São Paulo FC

1.  Verstappen 
2.  Leclerc
3.  Leclerc

I've seen some articles on sending BTC via SMS (using a custodial wallet, unfortunately), but aside from it being a centralized solution, I don't know if it's safe and legit enough. That being said, if people are in poverty, I think the issue isn't Bitcoin transaction fees or that you need a smartphone to comfortably send BTC. The issue is that these people don't have money to spare, and Bitcoin is too volatile for them anyway because they can't risk changes in how much they have when they barely have enough to satisfy basic needs. So the issue of poverty, the economic system, the level of corruption and stuff like that should be addressed (along with access to electricity and the Internet), and then maybe micropayments won't be needed.

While there are differences between countries, I think this particular issue should be considered within the frame of gender gap (global and by country), as it can shed light on some of the issues (such as that men are more experienced, women are more often unemployed). Also, there are still differences in upbringing of girls and boys which lead to major differences at a societal level regarding self-confidence, decisiveness and things like that.
I think more diverse groups of people should be encouraged to create their own businesses because they backgrounds and values and lead to unexpected diverse solutions and are more likely to enrich society with a variety of options and interesting things. That, of course, doesn't mean that men shouldn't do business or anything like that.

I'm happy to hear that the output of oil is down and likely won't get to record numbers. The differences listed in the article don't seem that big though; it's clearly not a dramatic decrease. Unfortunately, it might also have little effect on Russian economy and profits because if they get fewer oil but sell it at a higher price, it can compensate for the lowered amounts. But overall, it's important to start moving away from oil and start building economy on something that doesn't cause lots of harm to the environment. It doesn't seem that Russia understands this simple idea yet, just like it doesn't understand that waging a war is bad. Hopefully, the understanding of both will come sooner rather than later.

Unlike some people in this thread, I do believe that Climate Change should be taken seriously because there is a scientific consensus on the matter, and whatever sufferings we currently have in the world, there will be more if we keep ignoring this global challenge. So emissions shouldn't be disregarded, but do we really need space solutions for it? I recently moved to a country where recycling food waste is a norm, something people are expected to do and mostly do. I haven't done organic recycling before, but it took me a whopping couple of days to figure it out and get adjusted. If there's appropriate infrastructure that takes care of organic waste, it's really not a hard thing to do. Same goes for basic recycling of paper, glass, plastic bottles.

It seems that the company didn't fully pull out of Russia, and that their other reason for limiting operations was crypto winter, so it's not all related to the war. They were trying to play on both sides and lost, so I'm not sure I feel sorry for them. Namely, they partly cut their operations in Russia which probably gave them a reputation boost if branded well (as well as safety of not getting on sanctions lists), but they also kept their banking unit in Moscow and some mining in Siberia, so it's not like they really stopped doing business in a country that it trying to destroy another country. As a business, they should've considered relocations as well.

Because of Bitcoin, I learned a lot more about banks, fiat, and about economics in general, so that I can understand the differences between Bitcoin and other things better. These are things that IMO everyone should know but most people don't, even most of educated people. I also became a more chill person because of all the volatility and coming at peace with it. It helps both with Bitcoin and with fiat disturbances because I perceive volatility much calmer now. Bitcoin also made me more aware of financial freedom and privacy (and lack thereof).

I think whether it's enough for everyone depends on the purpose, kinds of usage and what we mean by 'everyone'. And I honestly don't think an additional billion of people makes a big difference here either.
If you mean enough for everyone to have a bit of money in Bitcoin, then yeah, it's enough. If you mean for everyone to have at least a tenth of Bitcoin, then no, not enough. But since Bitcoin is satoshis, and the price of Bitcoin grows with the increasing demand, 21 million BTC is enough if we remember those things, Moreover, everyone never uses anything. If it's money, we can exclude children, for example (at least to a certain age). If it's Bitcoin, we can exclude all those who don't have access to the Internet and to a digital device (smartphone or laptop). It also shrinks the number of actual potential users by quite a lot.

I agree with the op that it's terrible that many people still experience hunger, and I do believe that helping with such matters, even on a small-scale level, is important and likely more important than simply educating people about Bitcoin. Bitcoin is money, and if you have none, it can't solve it, after all. It can also be an investment, but if you're very poor, you have nothing to invest in. And by now I'm not surprised that this project is in Nigeria because, at least from this forum, it seems that Nigeria has many amazing people who want to boost their country's economy in responsible and meaningful ways by promoting Bitcoin and engaging with local communities. The kind of passion I see from the posts about Nigeria is unparalleled. I believe that eventually, all this strength of the people willing to work on making their country a much better place will become way more known, and Nigeria might even become an example to many others. And of course, here I mean the people, the civil society of Nigeria, not the government.

a)16 b) 2:03

I am sympathetic with the desire of Hong Kong to be a more free and democratic place that allows for both political and financial freedom on the level that is not allowed in most of China. The best Hong Kong can hope for is to gain some more ground within a special administrative region that has a separate economic system. As the article says, the prospects for Hong Kong look quite bleak, unfortunately, as more and more freedoms are taken away by the authoritarian China. I don't think Bitcoin can change that.

I don't think there's a single country that would meet all the requirements, and IMO countries where cryptos aren't regulated can actually be crypto-friendly as well (because the taxation wasn't figured out yet and because it's not technically a crime to use cryptos for any means that aren't themselves illegal). Many countries were mentioned, but you should really consider other factors, such as ease of doing business, ease of getting into the country and getting a residence permit to stay there, how democratic/authoritarian the country is, how economically and politically stable it is, how safe it is in terms of violent crimes, and other things like that if it's for literally relocating there.

I think it's awesome when Bitcoin  is used for charity. Some might say it's nothing special, something obvious and what could be done via other methods, but when Bitcoin is used for donations, it's actually used as money, so I think it's a genuinely good sort of usage, not to mention that the cause itself is very noble because people obviously should have access to clean water. This makes the world a better place, and also gives Bitcoin a more positive reputation. While the people who got access to clean water might not need Bitcoin yet because they clearly have more urgent matters to attend to, it helps connect different people (those who donated with Bitcoin and those who benefited from the donations), as well as make a difference, even if it's at a very small-scale level of one village.

1.  Oleksandr Usyk
2.  Under 10.5 Rounds
3.  Round 9

Game 1:  8'  1-3 Arsenal
Game 2:  8'  2-0 Southampton
Game 3:  8'  2-0 São Paulo FC