Not sure if you're being sarcastic, if you're I've totally missed that, sorry. However, even small percentages when we're talking big numbers is a massive amount. It's the people that feel it, not necessarily the government as much. That 0.1% will be felt for the next decade, and it's the people that will have to pay more in tax, and see their money become worth much less, due to the inflation it costs.

0.1% might look trivial on paper, but we're talking about some massive numbers here.

Sadly, these people are usually forgotten about or offered trivial grants that in the grand scheme of things isn't going to help. I mean we haven't just got a recession, we've got energy price hikes which aren't justified one bit, so a lot of people can't even afford to heat their homes this winter. That's in developed countries now, in 2022. Plus, that's not trying to be dramatic either, a lot of people will literally be facing this problem. Add together the rising fuel, and food costs, and you've got a recipe for disaster. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if we see it all over the news how people have died over this winter simply because they can't afford these essential things.

Not sure if you're just referring to Gold investors here, but I've never understood anyone that didn't think a recession has been coming. I've been saying it for quite a few months now, and I've predicted it to be on par or worse than the great depression. Considering the pound is at its lowest level, the housing market is pretty much heading for a substantial collapse, I think that prediction might come true.

Plus, I just mentioned this in another related post, but this is two rather substantial recessions in just over ten years, which basically means the same people who went through 2008/2009 are now experiencing again, another recession which will likely claim some banks existence, and will require investment to keep them alive, i.e the exact same as 2008/2009.

So, consumer confidence is at a all time low right now, which is only going to be compounded by a decline in the housing market. I know it's technically only the pound right now that's massively suffering, but every single market is showing signs of struggle e.g gold. So, within a couple of months I believe we'll be on a global level of decline, which will only be emphasised by the recent pandemic, and war investment with Russia, and Ukraine.

This is literally only the start of the recession, we aren't even knee deep in it yet, and the pound has dropped a crazy amount. I remember when you could nearly get two dollars for a pound, how times change right?

Ultimately, I believe this will be the reason people choose Bitcoin. I think it's one of the biggest reasons. Plus, us entering a recession, and likely banks needed to be bailed out once the housing market crashes, and people can't pay their mortgages it'll be very likely to happen. Then, people will find that the remaining banks which either haven't been bailed out or have survived will become very restrictive in their services, which will ultimately push people to other solutions.

Bitcoin being one of those options. The other will be that people will just hold onto cash. I believe that's where the world is heading, as the compounding effect of recessions means we'll likely get more recessions quicker than he have done in the past, meaning that the consumers attitude towards back will continue to decrease. 

The thing with the past was they didn't happen within years of each other, it was usually after a long time so people regain that confidence. However, we had one in 2008/2009, and we're in one right now, that's probably going to be the biggest. For banks to get bailed out twice just over ten years, that'll stay fresh in people's memory.

If Bitcoin reacts positively to fiat crashing, then we may well see Bitcoin further increase consumer confidence in it, because of that fact.

It's not much of dilemma really when you put some more thought into it. It's definitely going to be easier down the line, ignoring any bans of course. Since, a lot more people will be offering services, as we've seen them grow quite substantially over recent years. Seriously, try turning your TV on or browsing for a few hours without coming across something Cryptocurrency related.

However, buying a whole Bitcoin might be more difficult if it increases in price further. That's the distinction, rather than the dilemma. However, it's not a requirement at all for someone to invest enough to get one Bitcoin. So, really it's not a problem unless countries put restrictions in place that prevents the exchange of Bitcoin.

This is basically the same story for most of the investors back a few years ago. They probably are all in profit though, depending on where they sold even to this day. So, it's not like they lost out massively it's just they either lost faith which does tend to happen or they simply sold at a price that was inconceivable to them at the time they invested.

Some may have only profited a small amount in comparison, because they never expected their coin to be worth $100 or something around that figure. Honestly, I think most of the forum these days have less than they did a few years ago.

Yeah, and I wouldn't be surprised if we go on a unbeaten run when we actually start that run. I'm not hundred percent sure that'll be this weekend, as Brighton are a decent team. What I will say though, we've conceded a lot recently, and usually first. I find that Brighton at times can actually struggle to score even when in decent position to do so. Hopefully, that helps us settle some nerves, get on the score sheet first, and sort out business. I do think I'll be predicting something that isn't a win for Liverpool in an attempt to leapfrog my way up the table though.

How much do you guys let weigh ins sway your opinions? I usually take little notice unless there's a massive weight difference, and if a fighter hasn't made weight, as that suggests some difficulty in the weight cutting process.

Even if it didn't it would be unfair to the fans that already bought tickets, unless this event never went on sale in the first place. Still though, I'm not a fan of anyone buying out a venue when it could be public sale instead. I guess we'll find out on the night. If I remember I'll check to see if the tickets are for sale later. I'm assuming not, but it seems Dana is outright denying that the venue has been sold.

I'll also be posting my predictions, and betting slip up later. I'd appreciate some people weighing in on my selections, since I'm really not confident on a few of them. I'm probably going to go with a Dern win, for my betting slip, but will likely be predicting a Yan win.

I guess it's subjective, but when I've checked the London events they're quite substantially priced. Not like boxing, much cheaper than boxing, but still quite expensive. Not sure if it's cheaper or more expensive in the US, since I imagine it's a lot more popular over there.

Most users should already be aware of these recommendations, but also ideally should already be following them. Since, this is what you should be doing for every account you own. I don't quite understand why security isn't taught in IT classes early on in life. I was never taught anything about security, but everything about Microsoft Office, which is kind of funny looking back.

Also, just saying avoid phishing isn't the best advice, since that's obvious. However, going through the steps of verifying a link is what it is would probably be the best approach. Although, I feel like that guide would be better if it was done visually.

It's not the hot wallet itself, i.e the software, as usually they're fairly vetted, and have any issues fixed in a timely matter. It's almost always human error which leads to being compromised. Whether that's your living situation, your browsing habits or simply just ignoring security. There's also the issue of phishing, but I consider that a little different.

Ultimately, a hot wallet can be used fairly effectively. It's probably as secure as your other accounts, as long as you're not using it on a compromised machine or connection. As long as you follow strict procedures when downloading, installing, and connecting things to your machine, you generally should be okay.

However, that doesn't mean you should use them to store large amount of funds, since it's always best to go the most secure route as possible when it comes to that. Although, I suspect most users of Bitcoin have a hot wallet, maybe only in recent years being converted to hardware wallets.

Doesn't Reddit have certain requirements to be able to post to subreddits, and those can differ depending on the subreddit? I've seen that sometimes you have to be active in the community, and have a certain karma score within that community to be able to make your own posts. I don't personally follow the Bitcoin reddit, so I can't really comment on whether they have any restrictions in place along the lines of the above, but it might be worth checking?

Although, I appreciate the thought process along the Blockchain not being censored. Certain platforms would probably be best left centralised, because having them completely decentralised would be anarchy. I think that's the problem with us Bitcoiners, we think decentralisation just because it works in one sense, should be applied to everything.

So, how does it work? Since, I've looked at tickets before, and you can buy months in advance. So, how come someone can just walk in, and buy the venue, what happens to the fans that have already paid for their tickets?

Not a fan of the idea at all, even if the money gets refunded, people make plans based on those tickets. As for Zuckerburg, it does seem like he's been getting a lot of media coverage on his love of the UFC recently, I'm not sure if there's going to be a future partnership down the line or if the rumours simply came about because of the recent media coverage of him training in MMA.

I'm not all that interested in what their side has got to say, just get it done. Anything else is just going to annoy me, and the rest of the fans I'd imagine. I'm not interested in the politics I just want this fight to happen. Personally for me, and I think I've said this before I want this fight more than the Usyk fight. That fight I'm not even all that excited for. I'd ideally like both, but I think I'm being a little bit optimistic considering these fights always take months at a time, and a whole bunch of chatter on the side.

Usyk will probably fight Wilder before Fury, and that fight will probably take an age to make. I see Usyk actually losing that one too.

This is capitalism for you, and it isn't exclusive to signature campaigns. People do this in the real world too. We're constantly pushed into looking for the best paying jobs, whether that's through political or domestic pressure. People literally make a career for themselves by job hopping. I've known a few that have had multiple jobs in a course of a two month period. It's just easier to do it for signature campaigns. I guess the question is, should we really be judging those that are trying to make the best living for themselves?

I don't know exactly how I feel about the practice, since this happens everywhere. I'm sure it's quite annoying to signature campaign managers, but it's also not written into their contract or application process that they have to stay for a minimum term. They're simply signing up to earn money per post. If they don't make any posts or are below the minimum, and then leave to join another, they aren't doing anything, but potentially wasting the time of the signature campaign manager.

Not sure what you mean exactly, but isn't it possible to both respect a fighter for their career or persona, and want to fight them to progress your career? Honestly, I quite like it when fighters are friendly, and have a mutual respect. Plus, we haven't really seen this side of Jake before, which is honestly quite refreshing.

It took me a while to really click onto the idea, but Jake has built his whole career, boxing, and Youtube off of a bad boy persona that basically makes everyone hate him. However, in all likelihood, he's not the same guy that he portrays.

It's an act, very much like past time greats. To some degree, Ali was an act. Jake just does it a little bit different, and no I'm not comparing Ali, and Jake just to make that clear to everyone.

I think my point was, I don't think I'd actively be looking at usernames, but I can definitely see how someone might be subconsciously bias, and I think most of us are to some degree. I do think it's a bit of a problem if you're actively looking at usernames, and basing your perception of that username on that.

This is like one of the most common ways someone generates a name. Whether it be hotmail, MSN or Xbox. These types of usernames are commonly used. Like I said, most of us don't put a whole lot of thought into the username creation process, mainly because the internet has been around a long time now, and unique usernames don't really exist. I've actually changed my username just because I didn't want to be associated with another user that had the same username. Not because they were bad or anything. That's when I came up with the solution of just going the really generic route of "Welsh". That basically prevented that issue, and didn't take a whole lot of my brain process.

Most people will answer, and have been answering that until they're rich or basically set for life they won't sell all of it. However, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Why would you put that money in a currency which is guaranteed to go down in the future due to inflation. You're basically putting your money in something which is guaranteed to lose you money. So, Bitcoin or at least another investment is probably the better choice. At least with Bitcoin you've got a currency which was designed to be deflationary. Obviously, there's always the risk of it not quite living up to expectations, depending on what yours are. I imagine when it becomes a little more stable in many years, it'll be a lot more stable, and the money earning opportunities that you have today, will be gone.

I'm a fan of Fury, probably my favourite boxer. Although, it's hard to defend him when he's doing exactly what I dislike about boxing. The big fights just never happen, and it's exhausting. Also, the fact that he fake retires every other week. It gets exhausting. This is exactly the reason I looked to MMA, because at least the big fights happen, and they happen frequently.

I always assumed it was the promoters that were behind it, but it does seem Fury's just playing games, and having fun in his own head. At least Joshua looks like he wants to get the business done, despite being a heavy underdog. I don't know if this is an attempt to drum up attention for the fight by Fury, but he doesn't even need to sell this event. This is a classic among British fans, and assuming that's where it's likely to end up being at, there's very little publicity that actually needs to be done.

I don't know what to make of it, but it's exhausting, and highlights exactly what's wrong with boxing.

I think we fall into the trap that Tor automatically makes everything better, when it doesn't. Basically, when ever you add another layer to your security, there's the potential problem of introducing a new layer of attack. For example, there's some real concerns about privacy when it comes to Tor. That's been well documented, and actually made it to mainstream tv shows, but we still automatically assume Tor is safe.

The real question is your threat model though. Since, running Tor also removes some of the problems of running it without Tor. It would probably take too long to go through everything that could potentially be compromised from doing one or the other. So, it's really up to the user themselves to decide what's better from a individual perspective.

I mean, United are definitely on the rise. However, I'm not too convinced. Their best win was probably against us, but everyone knows how abysmal we were at the time. City on the other hand as been pretty consistent, and are by far the best team in the league right now. Especially with Haaland  who's basically scoring for fun.


So, while I don't think the odds should be that bad for United, I do agree with City being a sizeable favourite going into the match. I'd say City at around 1.4-1.5 would've been more align with current from, considering United are definitely on the up, and morale is starting to pick up from a terrible few seasons.