As long as the malware is gone or at least been trashed, that's what we're here for. I'm not bothered if someone takes my reports, I think that's the wrong attitude to have. When it comes to malware especially, that just needs to be dealt with as soon as possible to mitigate the damage. Hence, sometimes I just move it to the trash can when I can't nuke the user myself, and then allow the global moderators to see the report, and deal with it.

Unfortunately, reports have died down in recent months so I imagine this effect is more noticeable. Again, it's not a problem in my opinion, but probably more noticeable. I miss the days when I woke up to hundreds of reports, it's somewhat therapeutic to deal with. 

For the forum? Probably not. Other areas of the internet, likely will implement this, and I imagine even Google will come up with something to combat this sort of stuff on their own platforms. As for the forum, we probably don't see enough of it, and when it does happen if it's so indistinguishable that we haven't noticed it probably isn't that big of a deal. I know that sounds a little weird, but the thing about low quality posts is they tend to derail, and interrupt the reading experience of others, which is problematic. When you can generate posts which aren't doing that, yeah it's a issue, but its not a massive problem if no one notices.

I'm not sure if that's coming across clear enough there, but I do think this will present a problem going forward, but I haven't looked into it enough to figure out how much of a problem that might be. There has to be incentive there for someone to do this, engaging on a forum probably isn't enough. You could argue signature campaigns, but there's a distinctive difference to a high quality poster to someone who's using these tools. Even the examples above, despite being pretty good in terms of staying on topic, they aren't really saying a whole lot. It's rather generic.

I personally don't see a problem with users sitting on the fence. I mean, this is a new technology, which almost everyone when they come into Bitcoin doesn't fully understand, minus a few exceptions. The vast majority will learn more about Bitcoin as they go on, and therefore their opinion of it will change.

When I got into Bitcoin first of all, I didn't think it was going to change my life. I was just looking for an alternative, and it bare no more weight than that. Now, I'm probably what you'd consider a long term holder or at the very least someone who will likely be using Bitcoin for as long as it exists, just so I don't have to use banks, and let them dictate to you what you can purchase with your money or the chance of them going bankrupt in the future, and you only getting back what the government will guarantee, which varies on country.

So, I don't think you need to be absolutely sure why you're into Bitcoin right now. If it serves a purpose now, it doesn't mean it forever will, and visa versa.

Yeah, I was alluding to Hearne with milking the cash cow. If he fights Fury, it's likely another defeat in a row, and the fans will then start doubting his credentials. I like both of them, Fury is probably the only reason I still watch heavyweight boxing, but as I said above it would be justice to whoever's responsible for not making the bigger fights happen if he were to lose.

I don't want to see my favourite fighter lose his zero on his record, because ideally I want to see him clean up the division, and build a real legacy. Unfortunately, I'm just so sick, and tired of the shenanigans of boxing, that if he were to lose I don't think I'd be too bothered, and probably laugh it off.

It's a weird predicament like I said. Fury is my favourite boxer right now. Also, his deadline he set was absolutely ridiculous he would've known that sorting out the legals wouldn't have been rushed, and sorted out by then.

Without a doubt. He definitely eats more than the average fighter on the card. I kind of like that to be honest, but it probably isn't good for him to keep piling weight on, and then taking it back off to the very extremes.

It's just different to see, since most other fighters treat their bodies like temples, and there's ol' Paddy just enjoying life. A lot of people probably don't realise where he came from, and he's got a very similar attitude to the people that do come from the Liverpool area. He's a proper scouser.

Since we don't know all the details, have a look at the stickies over at the Bounties section, and see if what you want to do breaks anything mentioned. If it does, it won't be allowed. If it doesn't, then it should be okay. If you have any queries related to those stickies then ask.

This thread might be relevant too, as it depends what you mean by giveaway.

Even if it there was merit to the conspiracies (which I'm not alluding too) anyone with a lot of money, and are publicly known for that could be at risk. It's not specifically because they're invested in Bitcoin or cryptocurrencies. Since, most people who are rich tend to have nice houses, and cars, and whatever other luxury items it's generally quite well known when you've got money.

Same goes for Bitcoin. In fact, you could say that stealing someone's physical money would be a lot easier than someone's Bitcoin password or private key. Anyway, thought it would be important to establish that this isn't exclusive to cryptocurrencies, and the risk is the same regardless.

If you're asking this question, you probably aren't ready for either. A business requires a ton of work, regardless what line of work it is. Investing in Bitcoin takes a lot of patience, and isn't with any sort of guarantee. Both are risks, but it's generally accepted you could make a passive profit with Bitcoin if it continued to go up. A business, that's unlikely to go the passive route, especially if you're freelancing. There are some businesses which earn passively, I'm not saying that.

I generally think you shouldn't be convinced to invest in Bitcoin for the potential return. Instead, you should do your research, and determine what you'll do by the features of Bitcoin, and whether or not you think it'll go up based on those features.

Do you think people will generally become less trusting of banks, as an example?

Depends what's included in the data breach, and how two factor authentication is implemented. There's been leaks where the tokens which allow users to bypass two factor authentication have been leaked. This is generally not a good security practice in general, but it has been known.

As for two factor authentication, that also depends on how it's implemented. If you're relying on other online authentication methods, then you could be in the same boat if they were breached. Physical keys, which you can then use open source software to do a authentication request yourself is the way to go, but most services/websites don't support it.

I find it's usually not the fighters. The fighters want to fight, and for their own legacy they want to test themselves. After all, most of them have rather big egos. However, I find that their promotions, and managers tend to hold off from the big fights to try, and take as much money as they can by milking the cash cow.

Fury is trying to sell this fight, but at the end of the day he'll know how much of a joke it is. Fair enough, Chisora once was a great fighter, but he's never been the great. Fury is, and he should be fighting the next best which is either Joshua or Usyk in my opinion. Even if it isn't Joshua, that's who we want to see him fight. UK, against UK. Otherwise, match Joshua up with Wilder.

This is why I've pretty much fully converted to UFC at least we get the fights we want, because they don't wrap their fighters records in bubble wrap.

Each to their own. Although, I find him quite down to earth outside of fighting. The thing about the fight business is you've to put on this persona. It's what sells fights, and gets you fans. However, if you listen to him outside of that, he's actually quite a humble, and nice sounding lad.

I don't have too much of a problem with him trying to sell his fights. I mean Conor was adored for it before the fans turned on him. A fight career is generally quite short, and therefore the fighters try to make the most of it, and smack talk is a way of fast tracking that.

Businesses will always be wary of Bitcoin for as long as it's volatile. That should change given enough time, as Bitcoin has less block rewards, more people using it, and therefore the volatility not being so extreme. People will also tire from the constant inflation they're battling against, and the constant recessions so people will eventually be looking for an alternative, and Bitcoin being deflationary by design makes a lot of sense.

In short though, when the volatility decreases, adoption will increase. While it remains volatile, we'll have a lot of speculative investors, and therefore a lot of panic, not a lot of adoption from the bigger businesses around the world.

Most banks have fraud protection, and this is especially true when you're talking about multiple thousands. I've experienced this in the past, and I moved banks just out of principle. Although, I've found that pretty much every bank stops payments, and requires additional identification when it's higher amounts.

This is something that will only become more popular when it comes to digital money. So, we could see a lot of people making the switch to Bitcoin simply because of this.

Although, if someone does indeed want to use a password manager, please make sure it's a open source, verified, and offline password manager. The way Lastpass do it introduces additional risks compared to Keepass. That said, there are additional password managers out there that aren't Keepass, and satisfy the above criteria.

I generally think password managers are good for specific needs, but not for storing everything that's for sure.

I don't mean to single out Mr Big or anyone there, it was just an example since that's what I see. Although, I also thought that a lot of the user base might not even be that familiar with them since they're generally on the quieter side of things. Maybe, not so much in the local section I haven't checked. I get the impression all moderators put a shift in, but we do get some reward, theymos makes sure of that which we all appreciate.

However, that's just an example I thought it would be the easiest to make. There's a ton of users out there that dedicate their time to helping new users, the merit sources that I mentioned. It's a shame that some of the best users out there, aren't popular simply because they're dedicating their time to the above examples, instead of engaging as much as the popular choices.

Most recent reports show up first. Yeah, we see who reported the post, but honestly I don't really pay much attention to that. In fact, I've even hidden it in the past using a user script. Though, a feature was introduced earlier this year I believe, that made me switch that off.

Yeah, it shows who is reported, and it shows the thread title. Then on hovering over that you can see the post ID. I've got a slightly modified report queue on my end via user scripts though which make it a little easier to digest.

I'd love to see something done to the report queue to get it more efficient though. Although, reporting has died down a lot over the recent months, at least for myself.

Yeah, I go into it a little more below, but most of the actions I've taken in the last few months have been through doing it myself rather than acting upon reports. Although, I've also been away, so this closing to the year has been a little sporadic from my point of view.

As of recently, I'd say the majority of my actions are non reported ones. I'd be interested in seeing what the percentages would be, although it would be heavily skewed as a few users earlier in the year went on a reporting spree. The last few months have been a little different though, definitely.

Well, the popular saying isn't exactly beginner friendly either. We have to remember that we will have new users that aren't familiar with what a key is. Some might argue they should know that, but Bitcoin has now started to leak into the non technical user area, and people will generally learn as they go, rather than researching it before. Since, we're pretty much in the fear of missing out era, and people go in blind just in case they get lucky.

I said it before, but we've got to be as clear, and concise as possible without mentioning too much jargon, even if it's the most basic things as a key.

Honestly, I'm just sick of boxing's matchmaking at this point. This fight is a joke, when there was much better fights on the table for us fans. I think Fury likely knows this is ridiculous deep down. I'm a Fury fan, and I think he's the best of this generation, and beats Joshua, and likely Usyk if they did face, right. However, part of me wants to see him lose in this fight, just as a wake up call for boxers, and their promoters. They try to milk the cash cows for as long as possible, that when we do end up having the big named fighters fighting the other top fighters, they're well out of their prime.

The public has basically been robbed of a Fury vs Joshua fight for a few years now. I didn't mind with the Wilder trilogy as you always had that threat, but Chisora is well out of it these days, and it would take Fury being complacent to lose here, which honestly I've seen him get complacent before. The Wallin fight comes to mind.

Yeah, he's made a lot of people admit that myself including. I wasn't a fan of him at first, and I still wouldn't call myself a fan, but I can admit when I'm wrong. He's really dedicated himself to boxing, and looks half decent. Certainly no world beater, but no one should be expecting him to be.

He's already fought bigger names than most boxers have when starting their career. I don't know much about Andrew Tate honestly, he's a bit off my radar. However, the Woodley fight doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to me. Woodley had his chance, and he did the typical thing that earned him his nickname, and just freezes without putting volume out there.

Could be for multiple reasons, some of which might not be very easy to verify. It could be that the ideals of Bitcoin appealed more to Russia, because of the political situation they found themselves in at the time. Russian is also a pretty popular language on the internet, I do believe it's Russian, Chinese, and English that pretty much dominate most of the internet. I might be wrong in that, though.

Also, I don't know this off the top of my head, but when was the Russian section created exactly? Once we know that, you'd have a better idea of what might have led to that becoming the first local section.