No, since quantum computers will likely be only available to governments, and potentially high level companies. They wouldn't have any reason to attack specific users, or even Bitcoin in general. There's also been discussion that when the time is needed, Bitcoin could look into implementing a quantum computer resistant algorithm. Honestly, we are quite some ways off of having a computer with enough qubits to succeed. Even then, it requires motive which those that have possession or even the capabilities of quantum computing, aren't likely to concern themselves with.

Yeah, Max Holloway is a bit of a problem pick isn't he. I've seen him do extremely well, and I've seen him to the exact same in the opposite direction. I do believe he might be lacking that fire that fighters seem to have, and whether its down to his personal circumstances, I don't know.

I still think I fancy him to edge it on points. As for Hawes, its a difficult one. Seems the odds are favoring a TKO, but I just don't think he'll be able to catch Imaov cleanly enough, but I do think his damage in the first, and second will be enough to get him the win. Not entirely sure though, and I can see why people are going for his opponent.

Hopefully, we don't have any drop outs, because it looks like a fairly action packed day, with some good pacing.

Its alright, personally I almost always prefer a dark mode, so the "modern clean" white colour. I also think that whatever app, website or application you are developing you should always consider doing a dark mode. Not only is it easier on the eyes, but it generally saves battery life, specifically on phones. I almost exclusively use dark mode whenever possible, and when its not I tend to look to force dark mode.

What's the sliding option next to the "boards" dropdown used for?

At the end of the day, my attitude is if someone deserves merit, then they should be rewarded it despite how you came about them. I've probably discovered several good posts this way, but its all normal browsing habit, rather than making a conscious decision of "They merited me, lets merit them".

I definitely don't feel obligated though, and wouldn't go out of my way to reward a poorer quality post, just because they had merited me. It is sometimes interesting, that you get merited by someone you haven't heard of, and that can sometimes lead to looking at their post history in more depth. However, I think I've got the the point where I don't really notice too much who has merited me.

Good weekend of sport with a few football rivalries, and finally some UFC! I got so used to the weekly fights of the UFC, I didn't realize how much I would miss it in the Christmas break. Some good fights this week too, and the most beautiful thing is its at a suitable time instead of having to stay up to like 5am. My predictions are as follows:

Joselyne Edwards (points)
Phil Hawes (Points)
Ramazan Emeev (TKO)
Mike Grundy
Austin Lingo
Sarah Moras (Submission)
Joaquin Buckley (TKO)
Max Holloway (points)

What are your thoughts about these predictions? As for the other fights, (seems a pretty large card) I'm still undecided, and need to rewatch some of their past fights.

Not as far as I'm aware, and I'm not sure this is something that could even be considered suspicious? Its recommended to change your password every so often, most places recommend every fortnight, or every month. Everyday is a little excessive, but considering the password is being changed onsite, its implying that whoever is changing it, knows the previous password, and it isn't just being changed via email which could indicate a compromised email.

I'm not really sure what to make of this, except for monitoring the user to see if any behaviour changes. Other than that, it might just be a very excessive security routine.

I don't know what the procedure would be, but I'd assume they would just ask a few questions to the person that is changing the password if there is any reason to be suspicious.

Not all governments, but it seems western countries in particular America, and UK are particularly fond of putting pressure on businesses to adopt KYC, and this likely wasn't a decision that Bittrex would have chose without being pressured by that ruling. After all, I suspect that they'll lose a decent portion of customers because of this decision.

Rather than losing the war to regulation, you'll likely see more P2P decentralized exchanges which won't stick to KYC as much as companies are forced to do.

This is interesting, what's the general consensus on the reason it was removed?

I just see this as an opportunity for a company to offer what Bittrex fails to understand. I think this might just be a bump in the road as opposed to the "death of privacy oriented coins". Bittrex although a big exchange in the industry certainly isn't the only one. They've picked KYC, and reduction of privacy instead of increased business. So, there's a gap in the market for some other exchange to cater for this, and take a large portion of trade off of Bittrex.

This was likely because of pressure of the local jurisdiction of Bittrex (is it America?). Whereas, other exchanges in other jurisdictions aren't likely to be confined to the same regulations.

If you had a personal problem, then withdrawing was probably justified. If it gave you financial relief when you really needed it, then you made a good choice. You shouldn't let how this played out to change the way you think in the future. If you need the financial aid, that Bitcoin would give if you withdrew it then you should.

Investment isn't about being able to predict everything, and profit the most. Its about, remaining stable, and not going into debt just in case it plays out how you envision it. Of course, the above statement isn't completely true, when investing you're doing it for the sole purpose of profiting as much as possible, but try not to get hung up on things if things didn't go your way. Trust me, I've made investments, cashed them in, and then days, weeks, years later its double that amount. That's just the life of a investor.

Only invest what you can afford at the time, and if you need to take it out then you should, and although its hard sometimes to accept seeing where Bitcoin has reached, or any other investment for that matter. You can't tell you future, and there's no way of knowing it. To be honest, you might have not profited as much as you wanted too, but it sounds like you made the correct decision in withdrawing to help with your personal circumstances, that's the mature thing to do.

The best part about the Paypal adopting Bitcoin is not the service that it provides, but the fact that it almost acts as a "gateway drug" for a lack of a better phrase. Its the gateway for non crypto personal to adopt a new, and exciting concept, all because a reputable, and large company such as Paypal has implemented it into their system, which by extension improves peoples perception of Bitcoin, and its related technologies. The Paypal adoption is a very good way of intriguing people enough about Bitcoin, that ultimately they'll look more into it, and quickly come to realize the flaws of the Paypal system.

I do think this has been discussed though, there's been plenty of users here talking about how poor the implementation of Bitcoin into Paypal is for the end user, and how much it benefits Paypal, but that is usually the case in a capitalism world.

Its not just Bitcoin either, this is one instance where history has repeated itself over, and over. Some people overlooked the importance of the internet as a recent example, which now dominates probably the majority of the populations time. I believe people are cautious by nature, and therefore tend to not like change. Therefore, they stick with what they know, and there's a few pioneer within the world which start to bring the adoption to the masses, until it catches on like a wildfire.

Hopefully, we don't only just seen Bitcoin skyrocketing in the near future, but we also see more adoption in mainstream companies, since those (pioneers) would be exposing the Blockchain, and Bitcoin to more users. Paypal recently had this effect with them adopting Bitcoin, I've heard numerous people around me talk about Bitcoin, because now all of a sudden they trust it a little bit more that a company like Paypal has shown interest in it.

Although, hearing this is quite entertaining, because of the way they rubbished Bitcoin, I wouldn't laugh at them. They were very close to actually discovering something extremely profitable, or if they broadened their minds a little more, something much more important than that.

If we were to go by history (which has stated above isn't the best idea) Bitcoin does tend to correct itself after reaching ATH, but a all time high is only defined by exactly that; the highest amount reached. It seems we might not have set our all time high yet which means that we could still see a hefty price "correction".

Don't regret it too much, depending on your goals most people would have withdrew amounts before reaching any all time high, same as our last all time high a lot of people would have withdrew before it was reached. I tend to recommend setting a personal goal that you'd like to withdraw out, and then just enjoy watching the market from there on out, until you want to buy in again.

I have a very optimistic outlook on Bitcoin in the long term (which doesn't really focus on a ATH), but right now seeing the values that its already reaching is very exciting, and actually making me think that Bitcoin could become bigger than I expected. The main criticism I'm seeing from various places online is that Bitcoin is getting to valuable to quickly so it'll become an exclusive club, although that's not true in the slightest. Due, to the way Bitcoin is designed, it should remain fairly accessible for its duration. People put too much emphasis on 1 BTC = 40k, but forget that Bitcoin can go right down to a "Satoshi" (0.00000001). People get it stuck in their mind like traditional money where generally people only deal in 0.01.

This isn't revolutionary though, and certainly isn't specific to Bitcoin. If you've worked closely to software development or even overseen the process even small changes can take a very long time. First of all, you have to go through the idea process, then you need to get support for them, and then you have to finally come up with a sort of example, prototype or proof of concept. Only after these initial stages, and overwhelming support is the idea actually put into works.

Bitcoin is no different except for the fact its exaggerated since its completely open source, which isn't paying a full time wage for motivation, therefore the volunteers can be seen as hobbyists that propose changes, and those changes are either adopted by majority support or they are rejected.  To be honest, I would prefer a well thought out project, that is carefully, and articulately planned than a rushed one with major flaws, and less than intuitive design.

This is especially true when considering how important adoption is to Bitcoin. Adoption is vitally important, and each change to the code has to reflect that. To be honest, 300 or whatever the number of developers working on Bitcoin is tiny. When you consider that several small ish companies employ over thousand people when counting freelancers, and contract work to work on small scale websites, 300 people working on Bitcoin mostly on a part time basis, or the odd contribution is tiny for such a large project.

I'm normally completely pessimistic when it comes to the short term value of Bitcoin, and I made the prediction that it would drop for a few months a couple of weeks ago. Its lovely to be proven wrong though.

I wouldn't recommend investing based on this assumption though. Just because you've identified something has a pattern, doesn't actually mean there's a pattern. Investment should always consider your financial situation, and the current climate of the world. I feel like with the recent pandemic people might become a little too desperate, and invest more than they can afford to lose, at least expecting short term profit. (There's me being a little pessimistic again)
 
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this, but if you plan on selling at a certain price point, and holding until then keep your coins off the exchange. Its never good practice to store high amounts on an exchange wallet for longer than is required. Personally, I only recommend storing the coins on an exchange wallet moments before selling, and only moments after buying.

At the end of the day, they should still accept the responsibility that they are ultimately taking it into their own hands the moment they decide to trust your recommendation. You'll see a lot of users here recommend Coinbase, but it doesn't mean there hasn't been issues for certain users over the years. Doesn't mean the exchange is bad. Personally, I would tell them that there's two ways of trading, via an centralized exchange where you deal with a company, and you should do your research on the best for you. Alternatively, there's P2P exchanges which I'd explain the risks of that, but the potential of getting better deals. (not necessarily though)

I think its good to distinction between the difference of the two, and possibly the pros, and cons, but still encouraging them to do their own research on which type of exchange is best for them, and finally what exchange they choose (coinbase, localbitcoins etc).

It could even be more than that. There was a thread hovering around on the confirmed lost amount I believe, not sure what the total of that was, but I imagine the vast majority of cases go undocumented because your average Joe lost a wallet that he forgot about years ago.

Its the shock, and awe moment basically saying "its so worthless we will just erase it from our existence" by forgetting the credentials. A lot of tabloids, and news sort of sites do this, and to be honest its more entertaining see those words backfiring than anything. I doubt Wired are losing much sleep over it though, since they are probably worth a lot.

This is super common in any industry, and its my biggest gripe when learning a course through one of the learning resources like Udemy I've even caught University glossing over things which are pretty fundamental, and that stuff is peer reviewed. My recommendation when teaching someone is treat them like they are five years old, and describe every minor detail, in fact at the very beginning of their learning introducing them to complex, albeit major conceptions can actually be detrimental to their eagerness. Also, avoid using abbreviations, and jargon until they are considered intermediate. If you try learning a programming language this structure is somewhat important, but the best learning resources for me actually compared it to real life scenarios which you can relate to, and gradually introduced the jargon. This is especially important when it comes to Object Oriented Programming, such as important topic, which often requires real word examples for it to properly sink in.

I'll always have time for even the most mind numbingly frequently asked questions, because I remember what its like looking at Bitcoin, and thinking "What?". A newbie today, who keeps annoying you with boring, and repeated questions might some day become a part of the history of this forum through their contributions. Plus, sometimes it can be important going over these so called boring topics, because you might fill in a gap you didn't know existed in your knowledge, because explaining things to another person is a very useful learning tool. because lets face it most of us aren't experts at all, and are continuously learning.

As much as I'd like to see Connor, and Khabib in the octagon again especially considering it would likely be for Khabib's 30-0 bid, I hope it doesn't happen. Its not because I don't want Khabib to lose, but rather like the integrity of Khabib. He said he was retiring, and it annoys me when fighters or any sportsman announce their retirement only to come back for more money a few months later. I see the Mike Tyson fight as a little different as that was many many years after his retirement, but Connor I believe has announced his retirement several times, only to come back for the money. Its almost like its fishing for hype, and money rather than being genuine.

If the fight did happen, I'd probably want Connor to win, because it sets up an interesting turn of events. If Khabib did lose, would be want to reclaim his title meaning he stays out of retirement to regain his belt? The thing is, Connor is the only one that's really got Khabib to act out of anger, and out of character. So, he could be the one to convince him to come out of retirement for a crazy big event.

I agree, every other sport that I watch, I've been missing the atmosphere that the fans bring, except in the UFC. I love the coach call outs, the talks between fighters, and it gives you another element to the event to appreciate, and that is these guys aren't just muscle, but there's a lot of tactics to the fight.

I love watching a fighter pick up their opponent, and instead of just taking them down there they walk them over to their corner so they can get better advise.

Data recovery becomes more difficult as time goes on. The most the device is used, the more unlikely it is to rescue. Most data recovery software is very basic, and will only rescue very recently deleted data, and even then it might be too fragmented to actually recover. Plus, data recovery is very expensive, and most charge on a hourly rate no matter if they find what you are looking for so it can become quite an expensive service.

I agree that its not difficult, but its something that can often be rushed. So, I do believe its more likely to happen with Bitcoin compared to traditional fiat currencies. Most software tends to show you the amount you are sending as a prompt so software is your sort of safety net in this scenario.

It's just that Bitcoin is fundamentally easier to mess up, since addresses are rather large, and that's another point where people can trip over. I'm not saying that Bitcoin is worse either, I love being in control of your money, I can't believe we live in a world where people trust another person to hold their money, and even worse pretty much gamble with it.