Liverpool, and Aston Villa let me down today for 25k. It was an accumulator which had a few UFC fights sprinkled in, however I had Aston Villa to win, which if you take a look at how they conceded, and how their goal was ruled out, it leaves a bitter taste in the mouth. Although, I also needed Liverpool to win in both halves, which they didn't manage to do. Probably the closest I've every come to that sort of money.

I'm not betting on the West Ham vs Leicester game, but if I were I'd probably go for a draw. West Ham are probably one of the more inconsistent, frustrating teams in the Premier League, and Leicester are going through a real rough patch, but they probably have a good enough defense to keep West Ham at bay.

Edit: As soon as I typed that out, West Ham score. Still, I'll go for a draw.

Tuivasa has quickly become one of my favourite fighters in the UFC. The thing I love about him is, even when he's getting absolutely battered, as he was by Lewis multiple times in that first round, he basically just bites down on his mouth guard, and swings for the heavens. I love that about him, and very rarely do you see that nitty, and gritty response. Usually, fighters try to duck their way out of it, get away, and then reset. Tui just goes for it, and while it definitely isn't always going to work in his benefit, it is entertaining to watch.

Seems a good guy outside of the UFC too, and isn't afraid to have a bit of a laugh. Adesanya did what he needed too, but to be honest I wasn't convinced he won that by the margin that some people think he did. I thought going in the final round there was an argument for it to be 2-2. Whittaker definitely could have taken that if he just took a few more risks every so often.

I'm not entirely sure the best way of going about it. I just think it's something that's worth considering for future votes if this was to become a yearly thing for the foreseeable future. The only users that know the best user would be the local communities themselves, so they would have to get their heads together, vote for someone, and then present that to OP.

Though, logistically you're probably right, that narrowing the local section nominations down to "Local section hero" per local section or something along that lines is probably better, than having all roles available for voting per local section.

Undoubtedly, is a factor in some votes. Unfortunately, there's no real way of mitigating it, unless you did votes that were anonymous, however that opens another can of words. Anyway, has stated already it's a drop in the ocean compared to the amount that these users require to rank up. So, its not like someone is going to rank up their alt farm this way or even their account that they just do bounties on.

I think this round has highlighted the difference between Chelsea, Liverpool, and Manchester City with the latter two demonstrating they're much more likely to win silverware this year. It's hard to look past the two, though I'm actually hoping we get a lesser team lifting the trophy at the end. Even if I was offered the chance for my team to win the Premier League, Champions league, and then the FA Cup I'd prefer to see a lesser team just simply because I believe that's partly what makes the FA cup an enjoyable cup despite not being overly important to many of the teams that play in it.

FA cup to me screams grass root football, and it's one of the only competitions we actually see lesser clubs take on giants, and actually win routinely. Even if that's because the bigger teams usually field their youngsters.

One thing for sure is however it goes this weekend, I'm going to be a nervous wreck leading up to the fight, which should make for an amazing watch. I normally get pre fight jitters when watching my favourite fighters, I've had it with Fury in boxing, Adesanya before, and a bunch of other fighters too which always makes the fights better. However, this time I've got a decent amount of money riding on it, as well as it coming down to whether my favourite fighter in the UFC actually gets it done against probably the only opponent that has a chance against him.

Sweet, although from Peterson's view point, imagine having one of the fights of your career, and it being eligible for a bonus, then he forfeits that bonus by missing weight. You've got to think he'll find that one hard to get over. Although, in the future he probably won't miss weight again. I do believe though he has a track record of missing the weight so who knows.

It's quite the split, however nothing out of the ordinary for boxing. While, I'm not saying its right, I'd be willing to step in the ring with Fury for a couple of million. It's a record breaking amount I believe, which means despite his split being low in terms of percentage, it's still a large amount of money. I don't know what Whyte has made in past fights, but I can't imagine it being bigger than what he's getting from this fight, and if it was then it wouldn't be by much.

Fury should have an easy night, but you never know with Fury. He has demonstrated before that in lesser opponents he tends to get hit a lot more, and doesn't seem as motivated. See the Wallin fight, unless I'm actually discrediting Wallin there, and he's actually better than a lot of people think. Though, I do think Fury underestimated that fight, and on the night despite winning pretty much convincingly could have gone about it a safer way. If he does that against Whyte then there's definitely a potential knockout on the cards.

This is somewhat covered on the page:


So, is a less technical way of explaining it, basically your IP address loses its uniqueness in the logs as time goes on. So, at the maximum amount of time specified (24 months) your IP is only partially recognisable when compared to the initial IP logged.

User's threat models will differ between them, however its always best to try, and mitigate for the worst case. If you've posted under a IP address that you haven't obfuscated in some way, then you could potentially consider making a new account, but taking the precautions that wouldn't reveal any data you think is sensitive. Obviously, that's less than ideal for a lot of users here, but it depends on how much you value your privacy, and just how much data you might have given out. 

Unfortunately for you, if you haven't already opted into limited retention, the benefit of it is largely lost if you haven't been concealing your identity. To be honest, this is one of the reason's I'd like to see a newbie welcome screen which not only goes through rules, a questionnaire of some sort, but also explain these features, and optional opt ins at user registration.

Unfortunately, users that predominately post in their local section are likely at a disadvantage. It might actually be better if the local sections did their own sort of nominations within a thread in their local sections, but restricted to users that only participate in the local section. That might make it a little more realistic, since I imagine that those that post in the main English Bitcoin sections get a lot more exposure.

Don't know if that's something that local communities would be interested in, but it might make it a little bit easier for people to reward local section users without being stacked against other users that have further exposure. Could potentially liaise with icopress to get the nominated users in the local section put in the announcement of the winners. 

I'm all for promoting different ways of encouraging users to contribute positively to the forum.

I'm going to really try, and get all my predictions on the Friday before the events that are on Saturday. I normally don't do too much of a write up on why I've picked those that I have, just because I don't want to be mistaken for someone who actually knows what they're talking about. However, I might put up some words why in the future, and just put a disclaimer that I'm most of the time an idiot.

Adesanya better not let me down this weekend, so at least you know I'll be going for him. I'll be reviewing some tape on some of the lesser known fighters.

I don't watch the press conferences after the fight as its usually way too late for me here, however does anyone know if the Erosa vs Peterson fight got a bonus? I watched every fight, and I'd like to think that got fight of the night. Peterson was smashing Erosa, and somehow Erosa managed to ride that out keep his chin, and then go on a wild one with all sorts of attacks. There must have been two or more spinning back fists as well as some super man punches.

He's probably the most suitable for a title shot if Whittaker loses again. Although, like you say, I don't expect his style to be a good idea going against Adesanya which is skills striking at a distance. Strickland would likely need to come in with a different game plan if he were to get a title shot.

I've gone through  a real rough patch before this, so by no means should anyone be looking for tips off of me. Although, it was a pleasant surprise to actually put some results together. Usually, I lose on the first fight on my accumulator which spoils the rest of the night.

I will make try to post my predictions earlier though.

Four out of four last night, quite pleased with that. If Izzy can do the business now next weekend, then I would have profited quite a bit there. Total multiplier was something like x56. Knowing my luck, one of my favourite fighters that I am upmost confidence in will get knocked out within the first 20 seconds.

Think I might start picking out fights in events, rather than trying to cover them all in the future, since I've been having much more success recently by avoiding fights that I think will be competitive. For example, I thought the Strickland fight was going to be a little more competitive, but I just know Strickland while he does come across as aggressive, he only really ever does it in short bursts, for the majority of his fights he sits behind is jab, and looks to be safe. Despite what he says in press conferences. He proved my gut instinct against Jack, and that really did add to the total value of the bet.

Just wanted to come here to say how insane the Erosa vs Peterson fight was, got to be the fight of the night, and we're only half way through the entire event. Hoping that the rest of the card keeps up to the high standards the prelims, and early main event fights have set.

I'm hoping that Allen gets it finished within the three rounds, otherwise my accumulator will be void. I'm a little late sharing my predictions, since some have already concluded, but here they're:

Jailton Almeida by TKO @ 11/4
Alexis Davis by decision @ 1/1
Brenden Allen to win in Rnds 1-3 @ 10/11
Sean Strickland to win via decision @ 15/8
Israel Adesanya to win outright @ 2/5

Yeah, I know the Izzy fight isn't until next week, however I just added that to buff it up a little bit. Two out of the five have already came in. I've avoided a lot of the fights tonight because as predicted they've turned out to be a little bit unpredictable.

While this might be true in some cases, having a lot of posts deleted, especially when it makes up a large percentage of what you've posted in total, should be considered a warning. It might not have explicitly been a personalied message from a moderator, but having a large share of your posts deleted should start the alarm bells ringing, since it likely indicates your posts aren't up to the standards of the forum guidelines.

At that point, I would advise checking the rules, and altering whatever you think might be the problem immediately. Of course, if you seek clarification you can always ask a moderator.

I don't think Whittaker can the "game of chess" too extremely, because he'll just be picked apart from a far. He needs to close the distance strategically, without actually getting clipped, which is easier said than done. However, if he can get close, and I imagine his threat of kicks will aid him into making Adensanya bite, he will have a outside chance of winning.

I'll be rooting for Izzy, however Whittaker is probably the only realistic option we have that's capable of beating Izzy when they're both having a good day. The chances are slim I'll admit, but the division likely becomes very stale without Whittaker at least threatening Izzy.

I'm hoping we get a few rounds before a finish, and see a real back, and forth fight which tests both fighters. I'm not sure what's left to do if Izzy wins again.

This is just a personal assumption, and isn't at all backed up by any data. However, my hunch would be that given enough time, the highest cause of loss of funds will be through death, illness, and neglecting thinking about themselves, instead of outside threats.

By all means, external threats should be considered with the upmost due diligence, however personal circumstances, and the potential of compromising your own ability to access should also be considered heavily during the generation, and how you handle it from them onward.

You're absolutely right, accidents can happen. I didn't mean to exclusively say that only those of a particular age should be considering it, but rather putting an emphasis on those of a particular age that should probably be giving more thought into it.

However, I agree everyone should have some sort of contingency for accidents which might impair the person from accessing their funds. After all, you could have as much security from natural disasters, and physical theft all you want, but there's still an opening for loss of funds if you don't have a plan it something was to ever happen to yourself.  

Again spot on, I should have been a little more clearer in both instances.

I'm actually not a fan of calling it a paper wallet, it gives the wrong impression. I'd prefer to call it cold storage or offline storage, since technically it can be generated a variety of different ways, and you don't even need to have the seed or private key written down on a piece of paper, which could actually be less secure than other methods.

For example, some users might actually prefer to generate the wallet offline, and keep the seeds digitally offline too. That might not be the best option for a variety of reasons including, but not limited to fire, water damage, hard drive failure or whatever might cause the loss of the components of a computer.

However, the same can happen with conventional paper. Laminated only protects against smudging, and water damage. It doesn't really protect against other threats, like fire damage. Although, the largest security threat is probably local theft of the wallet, which is actually pretty difficult to protect against.

Also, while we might think of a variety of different complex ways of hiding our cold storage/paper wallet in plain sight, we might actually be making it more difficult for us due to convenience. Everyone, will have a different threat model, and we can't really apply a universal setup, which would be undeniably the best thing to do for everyone.

So, really it's mostly down to the individual on how they secure their cold storage. Although, one thing for sure is that if you're holding a rather large amount of wealth in Bitcoin, then you definitely need a way of securely generating the private key, and seed. While, probably not ever going online with it. Although, the medium you store it on whether that's digital, physically or hell even through memory (which is definitely the weakest that I've listed) all have their own drawbacks.

For example, something that a lot of people don't consider when they're creating, and storing their cold storage is diseases, and other health issues that might effect their memory. Which, I do believe should be considered much more carefully if the person that's setting this up is over a particular age.

Even if Bitcoin didn't go up by massive amounts like it has previously, I'd probably bet that your money being invested in Bitcoin will put you in a better position financially than the interest rates working against inflation if you were to have it sitting in a bank.

Although, naturally that might take quite a few years to show its difference.

Which the best piece of advice to sort of back this up would be when someone is thinking about getting into Bitcoin, they have to ask what's the reason they're. Since, if they're looking to make a quick buck, its likely not going to benefit them all that much. They are much more likely to have "weak hands", and sell at the moment of any resistance, which we most certainly go through a lot.

However, if they actually believe in the core principles of Bitcoin, and understand why its been so successful, and hopefully why it should continue to appeal to a lot of people around the world, then they'll likely be invested either permanently into Bitcoin or at the very least for the long haul, which is likely to be massively more beneficial in the amount of wealth they accumulate.

Well, it isn't really "out of nowhere" since it's a legitimate concern. Although, it's highly mitigated for the reasons that you've specified above. By the time it becomes realistic to break Bitcoin, there would have already likely been alterations to Bitcoin to combat it.

The reason it keeps popping up every so often is because it's probably one of the only legitimate threats to Bitcoin. There are other threats obviously, however we likely have even more convincing solutions to them. Although, this, and the government globally banning Bitcoin is probably one of the more realistic threats to Bitcoin, and therefore it's natural for it to keep being brought up.

The vast majority in the tech industry are already going to know about Bitcoin, otherwise they'd have to be living under a rock. We've past the appealing to everyone goal, we now need to be promoting, and marketing Bitcoin to the general public, i.e your every day Joe. Whether or  not something like this will promote it to more people, I'm not quite sure. I'm sure there will be a small minority of the general public who will become interested, just because it's cool, but in terms of adoption, I don't see that much of a benefit.

From the quotes in the article, it seems mostly an attempt to inspire others. Whether that will be successful, will remained to be seen. Personally, I don't see it being that great in terms of convincing people to buy into Bitcoin's philosophies.

I'm not sure what responses you were expecting, however I can't imagine anyone on this forum will have a negative view about literally becoming either millionaires in eight years time or at least being able to afford a house without a mortgage in eight years.

Whether or not I think that's a realistic goal is another matter. However, something that I think will definitely apply to the vast majority of those that are currently invested is they'll likely sell before it reaches that amount, and therefore aren't very likely to benefit from it completely. Usually, its those that vow to keep their investment into Bitcoin for x amount of years or the hardcore holders that sit on it for a very long time that sell. Most investors aren't looking for the very long term, and will sell at lower amounts prior to it hitting one million.