Liverpool surprise everyone, and wipe the floor with Manchester United, call me delusional if you want . I think Newcastle might be able to steal some points off Man City. Chelsea will likely struggle against Leeds, but I do think they'll end up winning this game. Arsenal probably finds is relatively easy against Bournemouth. Like I said, I expect Liverpool to at least challenge Man Utd now that we've got some of our players back, it might be too early to beat them convincingly like I suggested, but we should be able to show a little more quality now.

Hopefully, Liverpool can keep fit now, and actually move up that bloody table.

It's also heavyweight, so you don't really expect the fighters to be in the best of conditions, i.e ripped to the walls. I mean, Ngannou was one of the exceptions there, mainly because of his huge frame though. Gane's in pretty good shape for a heavyweight, but Jon Jones didn't look awful by heavyweight standards. Very similar to Gane in my opinion.

I'm not too worried about that, I do find the odds a little surprising considering Jon Jones is coming back from a lengthy time off, and he's moving up a division. Usually, anyone that's moving up aren't considered the favourite. So, I guess that gives anyone that hasn't seen Jon Jones fight, an idea of how good he actually was. He out wrestled DC which was absolutely nuts at the time.

I know it's hard to go about it when you haven't got motivation, but it's probably best you just focus on learning Python, before thinking about Bitcoin related projects. That's not saying within a few months you tackle a few basic Bitcoin related projects, but you probably aren't going to find the best courses or studying materials that focus on Python. I'd learn Python, learn programming fundamentals in general, and then move onto Bitcoin related projects.

There's numerous boot camps out there, and books. Generally, any decently reviewed book on Python are good these days. Some universities teach Python in their modules, and while you might not be attending the university you can sometimes find old module books being sold around the internet or local stores. I find universities really teach the fundamentals of programming well, better than any other book.

Yeah, I've seen his dad bod, but that looks like someone's who's looking to wrestle to me . Muscles definitely take a lot more oxygen, and fuel to get moving so I don't think we'll have to worry about his gas tank too much. I think he'll do well, I've seen some training videos of him, and he looks motivated. I just hope, he goes the wrestling route.

That's what you're basically betting on; whether or not he goes the wrestling route right off the bat. If he does, it's probably my most confident pick of the night. If he doesn't, it quickly becomes one of my least confident. Obviously, Jones has been great in the past on his feet, so there's no doubts about his ability, it's more a doubt on whether he's still got the gas tank, and sharpness with his lengthy lay off.

It's the responsibility of holding a currency which has no safety net, which I think a lot of users find daunting. I've felt it, I don't know how many times I check transactions when I've sending them. There's a real feel of responsibility since you know it can't be reversed, and you have to determine the fees yourself also. Since, software wallets tend to overestimate from my experience. There's a few things that can go wrong, you enter the wrong amount to be sent, you include too low of a fee or it could be things like losing your seed or not securing it well enough.

There's a ton of stuff that has potential pitfalls, and I think that's pretty understandable to be pretty daunting to a lot of users especially when they're making the switch from relying on banks to being solely responsible.

Honestly, I'm quite surprised we're still favourites for the game. I mean, Italy have looked fantastic, pushed several teams close already this tournament, while Wales have basically been shooting themselves in the foot, and haven't really pushed anyone close. The English game being the closest, but that's not because we were brilliant, just England are also a team struggling.

I'd say the games probably going to be close, and we do have a chance of winning it. I just thought Italy would've been the favourites. Obviously, I won't be betting against Wales, never have, and I'm not going to start now. However, that's some good odds for Italy to win in my opinion, and any neutrals might want to jump on that.

I definitely don't agree with brain wallets, I just thought it was worth mentioning. The thing about brain wallets they encourage less secure standards, than traditional wallet software, and generally as humans we want to make it as easy as possible. I don't many people do use brain wallets, at least I'd hope not. However, there's been attempts in the past to try, and prove when a brain wallet is generated with high entropy they're just as safe. Now, I'm sure we could debate that until the cows go home, but it has been attempted in the past on the forum, and they didn't lose their coins.

Plus, sometimes it's not about the complexity of the password, since you can have some pretty substantial entropy to generate a brain wallet, it's the way you generate it, i.e doing it online in my opinion is a absolute no go or even doing it on a computer that has been exposed to the internet at some point, is a no go. Unless, you have the upmost confidence in its security.

Hardware wallets have been known to have physical vulnerabilities, and someone might be more inclined to leave them lying around unsecured. A software wallet, you technically only need to save the seed, and generally you'll be warned to secure that pretty well. I'm not talking about a software wallet connected to the internet, I'm talking from the point of view where you want to generate an address, and just receive Bitcoin to that address. Since, with a hardware wallet you have to purchase it from a vendor, hopefully the original manufacturer, there's a element of risk of third party vendor having physical access to the device, and therefore altering the hardware wallet, with a wallet that you download, verify, and then keep in a offline environment you don't have these risks.

Hence, why I went on, and said about being more confident in securing a seed than a hardware wallet. Although, I could've probably been a little more clear in that. So, if I wanted to just generate a seed, and basically have a offline wallet, I'd probably not even need the offline wallet, copy the addresses, save the seed, and focus on securing that seed. Even, if you are going to be keeping the wallet offline, as long as its secure in the first place, it's no less secure than a hardware wallet technically. However, when regular access is needed, and therefore becomes a online wallet, a hardware wallet makes sense due to the reasons you mentioned.

However, for private key generation or a offline wallet, a hardware wallet is definitely more expensive, and potentially overkill if it's going to remain a offline wallet. If you intend to use it regularly, and therefore online then yeah I'd absolutely agree that software wallets then have more attack vectors.

It seems like the OP was talking about holding Bitcoin, hence the reason I believe a offline wallet should be fine, and technically could potentially have less chance of being compromised in a physical attack, since there's various ways of securing it, whereas a lot of people tend to think hardware wallets are invulnerable even physically, and buy them from third party vendors quite often.

The key thing is; if you want a offline wallet, that you are holding Bitcoin on; offline wallet generated via verified software. If you want to regularly use it, and therefore online; hardware wallet. The added risk to a hardware wallets depends on how you got it, and how you secure it. Those are the additional risks, with the latter also being true for offline generated wallets.

Worth noting, while the vulnerability was patched, I wouldn't doubt that we'll see similar attacks, but there's also less secure hardware wallets than a Trezor. Trezor are pretty decent hardware wallets compared to some out there.

So, my line of thought was due to third party vendor issues or an attacker gaining physical access it could potentially have more risks. Although, I'll admit I didn't really explain that all too well. However, the chances of someone doing that, and having a zero day exploit? Probably, rather slim. Although, worth mentioning since you can avoid the risk of that by not using it at all. What I will say; for the vast majority of users, a hardware wallet is probably going to be the most secure, especially for new users. Again, I should've probably mentioned that, but thought there was enough users saying that .

theoretically probably wasn't the right word. Needed to be something like if a offline wallet is generated under perfect circumstances, e.g airgap etc, then it technically can be more secure than a hardware wallet if it remains offline, or the seed is backed up, and then the wallet is deleted from the computer. I don't know, a lot of people will think physical tampering of a hardware wallet before it arrives to you, is so incredibly unlikely it probably shouldn't be worried about it too much, especially if it's bought from the official store. However, not everyone has that privilege since they don't always deliver worldwide. One thing for sure, is that is a risk that you don't have with a offline wallet that you generated. However, you still have to keep your seed secure, and obviously your hardware wallet due to physical attacks potentially being an attack vector.

Liverpool are clearing up their injury list though, and like I said having Jota back is massive. He made the difference in that game against Wolves. If you want to make some good bets, you'll have to time it just right, because Liverpool won't be down for too long, when their players are back, and they've settled in I expect them to finish the season strong again. Obviously, barring any other injuries that could occur.

Konate, Jota, VVD, and Diaz coming back soon, that's already some top class players that will make the difference. I imagine Diaz will be ready towards the end of March. However, the others have already started to settle back in after their injuries. I think some might have forgotten just how good Liverpool are, and the major issues they've had this season is mainly due to injuries, and a aging midfield. Get that sorted, and they're right back in it.

The reality is for a lot of new users is they're coming to the forum to learn more about Bitcoin, and they don't have a whole lot of knowledge. Some might have just heard of Bitcoin, and don't own any. In fact, I'd probably say the vast majority of new users don't own any Bitcoin. That's alright, I don't believe I owned any when I first joined the forum.

Asking them to stake an address so early could actually be a security risk. They need to learn the very fundamentals of security first, and to be honest there's not much to protect early on when your account is new. So, I wouldn't worry about staking of an address. I've used addresses in the past that were online wallets, I've made that mistake, and I can guarantee many experienced users that are now using offline wallets or hardware wallets have used online wallets before. I feel these days, people are more aware don't get me wrong, but when I first joined I didn't really value Bitcoin as much as fiat, and therefore I didn't look after it nearly as much as I do today.

New users come here to ask whatever they want. If that's altcoin related or Bitcoin related it doesn't matter to me.

Simplicity is usually the key, to actually remembering things. The more complex you make it, your security actually goes down as a result, due to the fact you'll start forgetting your own process eventually. Simply letting someone know that you trust, that if memory loss occurs they can remind you or show you what you had. However, that really is down to who you trust. I do feel most people have someone they can trust though. Usually, for a lot of people it's a partner.

The only issue with that is your trusting someone who's close enough to you, and could potentially be a part of the accident that might cause memory loss. There's a reason why the royals around the world fly their children separate to their parents, same as driving to various locations. You probably need two people you can trust to be quite confident that if you did lose your memory for whatever reason, they'd be able to help.

However, the more people you trust, the more risk involved.

To expand on this for any future readers, there's been attempts in the past, success one's that have tried to demonstrate the security of a brain wallet, with a large randomly generated password, and they were never cracked. However, the problem with brain wallets is how you generate them, a lot of users will probably go to a website to generate it, and that introduces a number of attack vectors, which you wouldn't have if you generated your seed via a offline computer. You've first got to trust the website, then you've got to make sure there's no man in the middle attacks going on, and ultimately you have to either download the code or run it via the internet through your web browser.

Also, it's worth mentioning just because something is open source, it doesn't mean it's secure or isn't malicious.

Linux can open any USB. Although, if you want an encrypted one, you can get hardware encrypted USBs which I'd much prefer than doing it via software, but you've ultimately got to trust the manufacturer of the device, since they've implemented the security, and more often than not they're closed source. You basically setup a pin number on the hardware, and then you put that pin in, plug it in, and it's unlocked. You can make them read only too, which is quite good for operating systems, and when you want to install them or plug in a live usb to a potentially infected computer, and take a look around.

I've got a few hardware encrypted one's, but I probably wouldn't trust them enough to put my seed onto them. I much prefer physical backups.

I think it also depends on the degree of the concussion. If you've got a particularly bad one it'll be longer since they'll actively be monitoring you in the weeks following too. At least, they should be. Honestly, anyone that gets knocked out should probably be taking a few months off, with potentially only light training to keep them fit. However, definitely nothing with contact.

I bet a lot of fighters don't listen to the doctors advise though, and just jump straight back in at the deep end. That's the mentality of these fighters, any time off sets back their preparations, and ultimately causing a loss in money. It's sad, but that's the reality. It's why we've seen fighters fight back to back to back recently while they're winning, not only to ride the momentum, but to earn that money.

I'm not sure what to think about the first goal being disallowed. At the end of the day, Jota did catch him with the stretched out leg, but my argument is he was pushed into that, and surely they should be looking at the push that caused him to go flying into the defender?

Jota made the difference though, even for the second goal. It's good to have him back, a real work horse, and I think him, Salah, Diaz, and Nunez when they're all fit, and firing will be quite scary. The only problem is fitting them all in. Midfield needs sorting out, probably a complete overhaul. Defense I feel like we're probably one player from being solid again, and possibly a backup for Trent.

We definitely aren't a million miles away from being the one's to talk about again, as long as they approach this summer the right way.

The day you stop using it regularly, your brain will become a little more fragmented. The thing is, our brain is somewhat good at short term memory, however the longer you leave it the worse it gets. That's without considering aging, various conditions the brain can be subject too, and the fact that no one can predict a fall which could damage the brain.

I know of someone who died while riding their bike, but it was probably just as easy for them to have sustained brain injuries (which is what happened), not died, and have memory loss as a result. In fact, it was determined that if they did survive, they'd have significant brain damage. That's just riding a bike, but we all drive cars or even walk has a little bit of risk associated with it.

There's a ton of things in life that can happen, that you just can't prepare for. You can try, and plan ahead, but you'll unlikely cover all the basis' unless you have others that can help you, i.e trusted people within your life.

Theoretically speaking, a hardware wallet has more attack vectors than a software wallet, however that entirely depends on how you intend to use it. Personally, I believe a private key generated on a secure offline computer is the gold standard. Whereas, a hardware wallet is more suited to those that need to access their Bitcoin regularly, and don't want to think too much about security issues that could arise from that.

However, I'd probably be much more confident hiding my seed than my hardware wallet, since physical access to anything generally allows more sophisticated, and out of the box thinking attacks, I usually consider physical access possible to be compromised despite no documented attacks.

A seed can be reasonably secured, and potentially be as complex as you need it to be.

Right, however to avoid other users trying to claim the wallet you'd have to be as vague as possible, and ask questions that realistically only the person that lost it would know. Even then, you probably can't verify it to the point that there's no doubt in your mind that someone owns it. I guess it depends on how it's find, and if there's any accompanying information with it, but thinking of the worse case scenario it could still be rather difficult to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that someone owns it. If they don't use the platforms you use, that just makes it a ton more difficult.

You'd have to be prepared to hold onto the wallet indefinitely, but the question remains are you still making it too difficult for the person who lost it, because you've taken the action of actually taking the wallet (despite being for safe keeping) away from the area that it was lost in.

I think BlackHatCoiner is onto something. Accessibility is probably what we lack, trying to get started into Bitcoin is pretty hard because a quick search via your favourite search engine could send you to an array of different sources, all varying in terms of accuracy.

Obviously, we have some decent documentation out there, however I don't think it's dominating the search results too much, and it's usually news, and sensationalist websites about Bitcoin that actually occupy the top spots, which is a little troublesome.

Given enough time, Bitcoin is probably just as easy as fiat currencies, it's starting off that is the problem. Whereas, fiat currencies are taught in school; Bitcoin is pretty much self learnt. Even if the documentation is readily available, and somewhat easy to find it's then the difficulty of convincing people to self learn something.

While, some of that might be true. Jon Jones is an incredible wrestler, and that doesn't require as much explosive power or sharpness. Therefore, he won't feel the rust so much. Unless, Jon Jones decides to strike, and only strike I can him pretty much having this fight the way he wants. If he does just strike, he's basically choosing the hardest path to victory. Even then, he's a pretty damn good striker.

Jon Jones in his prime walks this fight, but who knows what sort of state he's in with this lengthy layoff. Personally, I think he'll be alright.