A) Will Kansas win by 4.5 or more points? Yes
B)  Total combined points 133? Over
C)  Most rebounds? North Carolina   
D)  Most assists? Kansas
E)  Most steals? Kansas
F)  Most blocks? North Carolina
G)  Most turnovers? Kansas
H)  Total combined points? 139 points

You're right that some countries are already living in a dystopian society, including China, which has been experimenting and partially using a CBDC for a while now. But in the US, it's more subtle because it's a democracy and people value their freedom. Libra couldn't get approval from the Congress over privacy concerns, remember? So a CBDC would probably lead to strong debates as well. Not to mention that people love the dollar there, and I'm not sure if they'll support a digital crypto analogue of it. The US is exploring a CBDC, but such explorations could take years before being implemented, and we don't know what they'll settle on, and what sort of privacy concerns will be relevant. In any case, unless it becomes the only legal tender, and I don't think that's possible, one can always choose not to use a CBDC, even if it exists and becomes widely accepted as a form of payment.

This is a tough question. To me, it was obvious from the beginning of March that the active phase of the war will take months, and then there can be localized war situations (after all, we've technically had a war for 8 years in Eastern Ukraine). I still hope that it's months we're talking about, not years, at least in terms of air strikes, blockades, heavy fighting and abundant war crimes of Russian soldiers. That is, if Russia doesn't do something very stupid like hit Lithuania or Poland with air strikes, bringing NATO forces into the war. If that happens, I believe it'll be a WW3 situation, but probably with a way lower death toll and a way shorter time span. Russian army can't properly fight against a much smaller Ukrainian army, but they're no match for NATO forces and can be utterly crushed by NATO very fast.
What can be done to stop the war is the following: give Ukraine what it asks for: fighter jets, tanks, long-range artillery, missile systems. This will help Ukraine free its territories from Russians much faster, finishing the blockade of Mariupol and other cities which are in dire conditions.
Another thing is cutting all economic ties with Russia. The war needs money, a lot of it. So if Russia runs out of money, it won't be able to continue it properly. Seizing all governmental and oligarch assets, freezing their bank accounts, imposing a gas and oil embargo are actions that could speed up the process a lot.
Ukraine doesn't want to conquer Russia, we've already despised imperialist ideas. Ukraine only wants to be free to choose its own path, to have its sovereignty not questioned. Moreover, Ukraine is even ready to talk about employing careful approaches with Crimea and those areas of Donbas that weren't under Ukrainian control for 8 years.
Needless to say, Putin will have to go to a tribunal, and so will many war criminals of this war. Then Russia will have to pay enormous reparations for all the damage it brought to our land. Then Ukraine and Russia can stay neutral neighbors. Not friendly, this won't be possible for decades to come because of what Russia has done to us. But neutral.

This is a great April fool's joke, IMO. Russia wasn't a big economy before the war, and now it's only getting worse. Sanctions have affected Russian economy significantly, and you can look at ruble's value, at Russian YouTube videos about the prices in supermarkets, at the very least, to see how it's going. And sanctions aren't over, new packages are being prepared all the time. As for China, it's a strong economy, but it's heavily based on a difficult interdependence of China and Western countries. And the US already had a talk with China, reaching a level of understanding that China isn't to help Russia evade the sanctions if it doesn't want harsh consequences.
Also, China isn't a fan of brute force, not really. They prefer the economic and political wars with the West, not outright invading sovereign nations like Russia decided to do, and China is somewhat competing for influence with Russia in the region, so their interests aren't fully aligned. So this new order, thankfully, won't happen.

I wanted to write that 0.1% is such a low tax, and it truly in low, but if it's additional to VAT, then it's VAT that is worthy of discussion. VAT is usually for goods, and currencies aren't subjected to it, so it means that cryptos aren't treated as currencies in Indonesia. That being said, VAT is 10% in Indonesia, right? So, considering that VAT is often well above this, it's not a huge tax. But IMO a progressive tax would make more sense for cryptos, and something a little below 10% would be more encouraging. But 10% isn't terrible, and additional 0.1% don't make a big difference.

I remember when Litecoin and Ethereum cost roughly the same (around $20), so I invested equally in both. Of course, then the situation changed dramatically, and now the prices are extremely different. I thought Litecoin had potential to grow sigficantly, but it didn't grow much, and not I'm pretty sure it never will. Something like $500 is probably its limit. So, it still can be a good investment, especially considering the current price, but Ethereum is clearly a way stronger currency and will not be overpowered by Litecoin. But transferring BTC into LTC might be an okay idea. I wouldn't sell now, though, at such a low point. I think LTC will be worth 3 times more than it's worth now faster than the same happens to BTC. But I'm not sure, it's a tough question.

I don't think it's possible, and it depends on who you are, where you reside etc. If you're a regular citizen, and you want to sell rubles for cryptos, it might be possible on crypto exchanges. I believe they only freeze assets of those directly under sanctions, so unless you're one of those, you are safe. But they will ask you to provide ID and possibly other documentation, such as utility bills. And they will check whether your transactions might be a way of helping the Russian government to get hold of their money and evade sanctions. Overall, I think it depends more on the restrictions imposed by Russia than by exchanges, so you should look into those.
Of course, there might be some black market options, but I don't know that stuff and don't want to know how it works.
I'm sorry your currency is devaluating, but that's what Russia gets for the terrible atrocities it's committing in Ukraine right now.

I don't think they projected economic advantage at all. Russia isn't that dumb not to realize that an invasion would be followed by more sanctions. So they probably accounted for some of those, but allegedly didn't expect the sanctions to be as harsh as they are. Also, they weren't planning a long war. It's clear from both pre-war Western estimates and Russian propaganda that they expected to take over Ukraine very fast, in a matter of days. They didn't expect Ukraine to fight back as much, so now it's been going badly for Russia for a while. It might somewhat stay afloat if the EU doesn't impose a full gas and oil embargo, but I hope they will (or at least some major countries will do so individually), but no economic gain will be a result of this war for Russia.

Op's right that Russians are quite ready for material deprivation, so they can keep surviving and even possibly supporting the war while being under sanctions. However, that doesn't apply to all of them, as quite a few, who live in big cities, are accustomed to using smartphones and PCs, buying good Western clothes, occasionally travelling abroad etc., and they'll probably become increasingly more unhappy. As for European countries, it's unfortunately true that they made themselves more dependent on Russia instead of doing the opposite. But Lithuania today demonstrated very bravely that it's abandoning Russian gas, even though it highly depends on it. If more EU countries demonstrate such strength, this can truly cripple the Russian economy, not really leaving money for the costly war. It's a risk, it's a gamble, but the EU won't freeze to death, and there's half a year ahead to figure out potential heating solutions, as well as bring about the end of the war which can be followed, after Russia fully withdraws troops and agrees to pay heavy reparations, by lifting embargoes.

I think there's no universal answer, and it heavily depends on the details. Does the person live in rural or urban area? How high is the inflation rate? Are there severe food shortages? Are there electricity shortages or any risks of those? Is there running water and a risk of being left without it? What's the climate?
I'm not just making these questions up randomly, I'm formulating them based on what's going on in various regions of my country, Ukraine, which is currently hit by war. If it's urban area, it'll be difficult to grow foods on a level significant enough to make a food difference. If it's a rural area and the shortages are due to events like a war, there's a very high chance that there won't be any electricity (so lamps won't help) for long periods of time, and there can be water shortages as well.
If the inflation even hits 100% (and I'm saying this from experience because it happened when I was a university student in my country), this doesn't mean it's the end and you'll starve to death. It means you'll be able to afford very significantly less than before, and if you salary wasn't good before, you probably need to find a second job. But food shortages won't necessarily follow, so no need to buy loads of wheat which, let's be honest, you won't use anyway unless you're at a starving point (and inflation doesn't do that).
Essential and very useful things are those you can eat without cooking, those that can last for at least months without electricity, and those that can help satiate hunger. Nowadays, there are many protein bars, oatmeal bars and stuff like that, which can be super helpful in difficult times: they're small, very long-lasting, generally tasty (so you'll probably be willing to eat them even in case things work out well), and give your organism energy.

I googled it, and the first link online I got what on how the Vatican isn't paying in rubles . The report of it doing so was based on a tweet which turned out to be a joke, but some media fell for it, so it became widely spread. I see that people in the thread also point out the questionable credibility of this news, and it seems that they're right to do so. As for the question about gas and rubles, if you mean the first country in Europe geographically, then I'm sure Serbia won't mind, as it's already very pro-Russian. If you mean the EU, it seems to me that they're against rubles, but that there's a workaround via Gazprombank, so that EU countries can pay in euros, and the bank can convert the payments to rubles.
In the meantime, we have the first EU country that abandoned Russian gas despite being heavily dependent on it: Lithuania.

If Satoshi comes back just to say hi and confirm being alive and well, I'd be happy to hear that. If Satoshi says 'hey, so I decided to come back to Bitcoin and take part in its further development', I'd be okay with it because it's certainly Satoshi's right to do so, but I think it would harm the decentralization of Bitcoin a bit because there'd be one person whose opinions matter more than opinions of other developers. And if some of Satoshi's coins move, I guess I'll be happy to see that access to them isn't lost and I'd treat it as proof that Satoshi is alive.

Game 2:  36'  1-0 São Paulo FC
Game 3:  36'  1-0 Arsenal

Kansas vs. Villanova
A) Yes
B)  Over
C) 135

Duke vs. North Carolina
A) No
B)  Over
C) 154

That's not true, the risks are not nearly as high as you present them, which is why the EU must impose a gas embargo on Russia. There's the statement that EU already has enough gas till the end of winter. Now it's getting warmer, so the matter of gas will become relevant from the next heating season, starting in October. It's half a year away from now, and Germany buys around 40% of gas from Russia (so more than half is already covered by other sources). Also, the US said it'll help EU (and US has quite a lot of gas). Not to mention that if the Western world acted more swiftly right now, they could make the war end sooner, and then they could work out new deals with the new Russian government, including gas deals.

I think that when a person falls for a scam, loses access to coins or loses money on a crypto investment while being ill-informed, it's not Bitcoin's fault, so it's not right to say that Bitcoin does harm to these people. I lost some money in early days because of using an online Ethereum wallet without having private keys, and the owners basically committed an exit scam. I was new and didn't know the 'not your keys, not your coins' thing, and I, luckily, didn't lose much. But, in any case, I never blamed Ethereum or the crypto market for that event and didn't associate my experience with some inherent risks of the crypto market.
So yeah, it's important to learn, to be careful, and to not spread hate about cryptos if you made a mistake.

I don't see why that would happen, actually (I mean, the growth). Do you mean the USD becoming super volatile because of being valued based on Bitcoin as a standard? How would that help anything? Investing in Bitcoin, promoting pro-crypto businesses, making favorable regulations - sure, they could all be helpful. But linking currencies, and making something that's susceptible to inflation but fairly stable dependent on something generally growing in value, but very volatile, doesn't seem like a good idea. Also, there are good things about printing money. It's truly needed to help people during hard times like the pandemic.

We live in a very bizarre world. A couple of people here mentioned some facts and said they thought it was a Fool's Day joke, which it technically wasn't. Many things happen that seem unbelievable, and sometimes it's impossible to determine if something actually happened or if someone decided to joke about it. So I opened news in Google if you choose "Bitcoin" for the search. There's pro-Bitcoin Goldman Sachs (joke or not? I have no idea), an article about PoS named "Will Ethereum replace Bitcoin" (which is certainly a joke, Bitcoin can't be replaced with Ethereum, but the article might have meant it seriously). The lines between serious and funny, real and fake, are being blurred.

Today's a Fool's day, and I must say I thought the video would at least be somehow about Satoshi or potential candidates, so you got me, op.
As for Satoshi, I agree with others that it's better this way, with the identity of Satoshi unknown. After all, all people have their flaws, and Satoshi's flaws would make some turn away from Bitcoin because of the beliefs of this person not aligning with beliefs of someone else. Also, Satoshi's opinion about further direction of BTC development would have had big impact, and this is not very pro-decentralization.

Well, given how strongly the Russian economy is being hit by sanctions right now, it's no secret that Russia needs everything it can get to compensate for this change. Not to mention the oil and gas embargo by the US, which is setting an example, while selling these resources is the backbone of Russian economy. I wonder if it'll actually get adopted, though. Another thing I wonder is how many businesses would actually want to be in Russia now, including mining farms, given how fast it's going in the direction of North Korea. Even many Russians (at least around 200 thousand people), especially educated ones, are fleeing the country.