For most developed countries, there's usually laws preventing a bank actually stealing your money. For example, in the UK, and the USA you are covered up to a certain amount of money if anything happens to the bank. For example, if they went bankrupted you are covered up to 85k in the UK I believe. So, your point about banks stealing money only applies if you have money above this threshold stored in one bank. However, you can mitigate this by having multiple banks which are legally registered, and covered which would allow you to effectively increase this threshold.

The biggest draws to Bitcoin are likely its decentralized nature, and the fact that there is a logical, and definite way of circulating the currency. There is no printing off more Bitcoin or introducing new Bitcoins into circulation, there is no massive injection of Bitcoin at one time. The math has pretty much been already done, and Bitcoin will continue down the path of releasing more Bitcoin into circulation at a steady pace.

Regarding decentralization; that's got to be the biggest draw. At the moment, the government, and various companies that handle your money in traditional fiat currencies means that you have to rely on several third parties to actually make a payment. While, the government has complete control on your money, and have heavy regulation. Bitcoin, which is now taxed by the majority of companies also has regulation, but is far less than that of a fiat currency in terms of the restrictions imposed on fiat currencies. For example, fiat currencies usually have a fee for transfers outside the origin country, and various other handling fees. You actually determine your fee in Bitcoin, it might mean that the transaction might take longer than average, and is definitely slower than fiat currencies currently, but it has a dynamic fee which you determine by increasing or decreasing the incentive for miners.

However, the reason you might invest in Bitcoin might be different from mine. For example, curently due to the nature of the Bitcoin market, there are plenty of investors investing into Bitcoin simply because its profitable, and is probably the most profitable nature due to the frequent swings in the market. Simply put; its a very volatile economy, which actually creates  some very profitable margins.

Besides, all of your proposes doesn't actually reduce spam, well to a certain degree it might. However, what it is most likely to do is concentrate the spam in one section, which means that the section becomes a rather annoying section to read, which would probably reduce the amount of users actually contributing to the section. I actually quite like B&H current state. There is spam, and wrongly posted threads there, but it isn't too big of an issue. We could probably do with a bit more reports in that section, but currently there does seem to be a big emphasis on helping newbies out in that section, and I would prefer us to be more welcoming to new users, than too hostile by limiting their actions based on the few bad users we get.

I used to quite like the idea of a modified newbie jail, instead I would probably opt for a shadow ban system, where new users posts are manually approved by moderators. This could potentially be implemented with merit, and once they have earned 1 merit, or whatever amount that would be acceptable, they would no longer need to be approved.

It creates a little extra work for moderators, and staff users, but the overall improvement to the rest of the forum should be worth it. The only unfortunate side of that is, some newbies will be confused by it, and would likely try posting the same reply/thread several times or create threads asking why their post isn't visible. However, if we treat it as; a shadow ban, which the logged in user sees their post then there shouldn't be too many issues. If we have enough activity between moderators, and can cover all time zones, then there shouldn't be too much of a delay that effects new accounts negatively.

Whether Tyron Woodley prepares correctly or not for this fight, if Jake Paul wins then I'll give him props for it. He looks like a decent technical striker, and the only critism I have for him if we take out all the drama, and Youtube side of things; is he has cherry picked his opponents. However, what up, and coming boxer doesn't? Most get fed bums (for a lack of a better word) to keep the hype surrounding them going. So, he isn't actually doing anything wrong if you compare it to the rest. However, Tyron Woodley isn't known for terrible striking instead hes actually quite good. Boxer or not, it would be an achievement, and actually something credible to beat him.

Massively impressed with Moreno. I expected him to win in this rematch, but I didn't expect it in such style. Fig didn't really get settled in, and was completely outmatched in all departments. While the Nate Diaz Vs Leon Edwards fight was probably the most exciting due to the ending, but Moreno VS Fig was definitely the better overall fight. Adesanya VS Vettori was as expected I guess. Vettori nearly getting a choke at some point, but was largely outclassed for much of the fight. Adesanya could only beat what was in front of him, and with Vettori just seeming like he wanted to stay out of the danger zone against Israel all he could do was what he did on the night. Vettori, at times looked clueless, and was just hugging israel as the hip line, without actually fighting for a position. It was a little weird, almost like Vettori was completely demotivated.

This is generally the case for everything. You can either become a master of something or be a more rounded, jack of all trades type fighter. Edwards is alright, and Diaz is an absolute warrior much like Ferguson. I don't think we will see a stoppage either way in the fight, I think it'll go to a decision regardless who actually gets the decision. I do think, Diaz will take it home though, but that really does depend on how much damage he wears. I've noticed the last few weeks the scorecards have been a little questionable, so I'm hoping for some sound judging, and a good weekend of fighting without too much drama because of the judges.

If we were to do anything about registration of accounts, I'd like to see the least restrictive as possible, which I believe would be the shadow ban, that Hilariousandco mentions. As I believe this is a better option than the suggestion of simply preventing new accounts from posting links, as they will find a way around it which would be difficult to automatically block. Yeah, the link likely won't be clickable, but its still advertising that service through text. At least, with a shadow ban, and whitelist system in place the majority of the forum wouldn't see the spam. The only issue with that, is its not particularly welcoming to new accounts, and I like to be as welcoming as possible really.

The thing is with this point, there's no way of really knowing whether they do monitor your transactions after you have used their service. In all likelihood they don't, but most exchanges to be regulated, licensed, and GDPR friendly will have to keep some sort of record of purchase, and sales. Therefore, they could potentially just look at the history of an address, and figure out your entire transaction history with that address.

Are they likely to do that, probably not. However, if the exchange was breached then malicious attackers might find that information useful depending on their goals. In all likelihood, there are records of who/what bought x amount of Bitcoin, and what address that came from or went too. However, they aren't likely actively monitoring this.

Which is very similar to the current market share in more traditional currencies; they are run by the rich, and as we know, a mining council would effectively remove the decentralization aspect of Bitcoin, and would likely making it easier for the rich to send transactions, and make it cumbersome, and hard for the rest of us.

Plus, the only way we could actually combat this is via owning a significant portion of the hash rate, and that requires significant investment. Usually, those that are mining with a significant portion like you stated are companies with huge mining operations, which are going to be more inclined in making it easier for themselves, and removing the competition.

The only thing we do have; its unlikely that all pool operators, and companies will agree, and this council would likely fall on its arse. If I've learned anything in life, its that when you get a lot of people together, even with similar goals they aren't likely to agree or be willing to share the power that they could have.

I disagree, and thought Moreno actually did really well, and even without the eye poking, and groin striking incidents, the fight was a close one, and could have really gone either way. I remember saying that this is probably the fight of the year at the time. It was a fantastic fight, and I'll be rooting for Moreno to take this.

I'm actually fancying the underdogs this fight night. I actually think that Moreno, and Diaz might take the wins here, with Adesanya taking the win over Vettori. So, here's my main event predictions:

Nate Diaz (decision)
Moreno (decision)
Adesanya (TKO)

Vettori if he gets the takedowns could take the win over Adesanya, I'm just not convinced he will, and will get knocked out or hurt while trying to shoot for the legs. Adesanya is probably one of the best throughout all the divisions at managing distance.

I don't hide signatures. I've definitely been influenced by signatures here on the forum in the past, and I'm sure that's true for everyone that doesn't hide them. Being influenced even by a advertisement isn't always a bad thing. I've discovered some quite cool projects over time, and I'm sure there's been instances that people have found services that appeal for them, well its a given really.

Depends on the type of participants that they had as a data set. However, a referral link isn't a catch all. Advertising doesn't always work for direct links, however getting the product in the mind of a potential customer is what you want to do. I tend to be quite good at blocking out advertisements on TV etc, but I've even noticed that Sponsored videos on Youtube, while I haven't used the infulencers direct coupon code, they got the product in my mind, and when I needed something like that, it was that company I thought of.

So, there's direct advertising, and indirect. We know advertising works, because I bet the majority of this forum are aware of the companies that regularly advertise through signature campaigns. In fact, the very lure of getting paid to post, is an advertisement, because it creates brand loyalty. If x company pays you to post, and you use them, you're more likely to actually use their service over a competitors.

Therefore, even if you don't get direct referral link clicks, the advertisement itself is still working. I've even had messages asking me about the advertisement in my signature in the past. So, people are definitely noticing them even if they aren't clicking them directly. We have to remember as well, not everyone will know that the links are clickable.

This might just be because none of them interest you. We know advertisements work, since TradeFortress built their entire online wallet out of the advertisements. It become widely used, and I would assume that this was majority built on his signature campaign they were running at the time.

I've not clicked on many, but I have. Especially, more personal projects. I'm visited quite a few personal websites of users here. A few years ago, it was more common to use the signature for either personal projects or personal interests. For example, I used to have a Slackware link, because at the time I was tinkering around with it, and enjoying it.

So, for a advertisement to work it needs to hit the right audience, and the number of clicks a referral link gets doesn't necessarily indicate how good the advertisement is working. Its an indication, but because most people would likely digest that advertisement subconsciously or indirectly look it up, then it only catches a few, and isn't a catch all.

We know advertisements work. Edward Bernays taught us that the human mind is very susceptible to information, even if its completely wrong propaganda. If anyone hasn't read his book, I recommend it to get some insight on how governments control its people. However, going back to if advertisements work; they work very similarly to propaganda, and both are used to influence the population. Just think of it, anywhere you go on the internet, real life, or just anywhere you will see probably 100s of advertisements a day. You might not register all of them consciously, but you've seen them subconsciously. So, the next time you want something related to that advertisement, you'll remember it.

There isn't an argument to be found when arguing against the effectiveness of advertisements. We know advertisements work, in fact we are now more aware they work, since our platforms like TV, and even Youtube are becoming more, and more advertisement friendly. Youtubers have found out that, they can earn more money, and companies can earn more money by putting a sponsored video by the infulencer inside the actual video, instead of via Youtube ad breaks, because its more personalized, and the followers of that person are more likely to take note of the advertisement. This is the same for this forum, if you particularly like someone or someone's content on here, you are probably more likely to be interested in what they are advertising.

Take theymos talking about Grin coin, now he was very cautious about clearly defining that he doesn't necessarily recommend investing into Grin coin, but was more excited by the technology behind it, while clearly defining his opinion on the rather big short comings. However, take a look at how many people rushed to the announcement thread once Grin coin was officially accepted on Bitcointalk for Copper membership. Now, most of them would have likely never heard of it or at least it would have taken years for them to even take a whiff of the name GrinCoin. However, that announcement thread was flooded with all kinds of users, even those that probably don't even visit the altcoin section.

Just to be clear, I don't think theymos was advertising GrinCoin (at least not directly), but you can see the impact that someone who is maybe looked up too, can have on others. So, advertisements in signatures work in the same way.

That's my thoughts too. Boxing in my opinion is getting a little bit ridiculous, and when we consider that there's a few UFC fighters currently unhappy that they don't even earn a fraction of what Logan Paul, a youtuber got paid in their entire careers I can kind of see why they are a little upset. Plus, I'll be honest charging for Logan Paul Vs Mayweather as a pay per view event is daylight robbery. So, I'm going to encourage this sort of mockery, as I'm sure any fans that paid for that fight with Logan Paul are a little bit disappointed. However, I guess those that did pay for it, were not expecting a match of boxing, but just bad scrapping.

Finally get to have a gather around this weekend to watch the UFC. I can't wait, a few beers, and Israel Adesanya who is currently my favorite fighter is coming back after his first loss, which I'm expecting him to be quite hungry. The great thing is, hes chosen Vettori who has a very rounded ability, and especially is good at wrestling, which Adesanya was caught out with against Jan. I'll put my predictions up later on, but what a card we have this weekend even outside of the main event! 

mk4 is correct. Its not the quantity of back links that get the site ranked higher, Its the quality. If you get 10,000 back links from random websites that aren't related to your niche, Google isn't going to like that. If you were to get a few from a highly focused niche related to your website then your much more likely to be helped with Google ranking or any search engine for that matter.

One way of doing it is; guess posts like mk4 mentioned. This is probably the most cost effective, and safest ways to do it. Google is incredibly strict with its ranking algorithm, and its constantly evolving. So, when considering your targets, its better to have a lesser popular site, that is highly focused to your niche, than to have a very popular website that has nothing to do with your niche.

You should be considering your site's future SEO as well. If buying low quality links work currently, will they work if Google decide to do a reform? obviously, there's no guarantee here, but its more likely you'll have success with handpicked guest posts, than dubious links from random websites.

It makes sense too. Google is a search engine, so it is generally trying to link things together, and suggest things to its users based on their preferences. So, it makes sense to only get links from niche specific websites, since that's more appealing to Google, because its more appealing to its users. 

I mean, sure I would probably agree that the current situation means Bitcoin isn't great as a currency, but there are people out there that do use it as one. Most people I know that are serious about Bitcoin are currently holding or investing somewhat regularly. Although, I would say most of the adoption we've had is from speculative investors so they aren't exactly healthy for the currency in the long term, since most will likely want to get out. Therefore, it could be suggested that these investors could actually mean there will be more frequent bull runs, rather than longer ones which could actually effect the confidence of others in Bitcoin.

I just don't think its as black, and white as it might appear. Bull runs are exciting, and everyone wishes they invested sooner, and the bull run lasted longer. However, I'm actually not that bothered by how Bitcoin reacts in the short term. In fact, I would personally like to keep Bitcoin as low as possible for the time being, so we could acquire more for services provided.

How is Elon openly challenging cryptocurrencies? From my interpretation, he actually still supports the idea of cryptocurrencies, and in fact he's been very supportive to Dogecoin, which admittedly I do think is kind of a joke, as he's been known to troll in the past. However, his statement that was released didn't actually attack Bitcoin openly. It was more of a way to save PR, and disassociate Tesla with Bitcoin which is currently seen as a fossil fueled machine. Whether that is accurate or not, doesn't matter to Elon. What matters is what his stakeholders think, and what his customers think. I do believe the statement even stayed somewhat friendly towards Bitcoin with a positive statement towards the end, which I forget now. I think it was hinting that it could be implemented again if the issues brought up were rectified. 

Your question isn't quite clear, so I'm going to assume that your talking about this forum software, and how you progress in rank. Well, we have a somewhat different system to most places. You can read a little about it here:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2818350.0

Although, we have sticky threads within the Meta section, which documents pretty much everything you need to know. If there's something you aren't sure about, and can't find by just browsing use the search function. For example, if you want to know how to progress in rank, and are curious about the "merit" text on your profile, go to the Meta section, and use the search function to search "merit", and a list of threads will come up.

Otherwise, create a new thread if you can't find the information following the advice above. Try to be ask specific questions though, so we can actually help you a little more.

This isn't usually enabled by default, and would either need to be compromised in the first place or the user themselves must turn it on. So, generally its the user that compromises themselves through their usage, rather than operating systems being insecure. Windows, and Android are actually pretty safe from most attacks. Its the user themselves which reduces that security.

Linux is generally more secure not only because its not as widely used, but its also used by more technically minded users, generally. However, because of the way the file system, and permission system works its inherently a little more secure than that of a default Windows system.

This is generally the case for everything. Its even worse once things start getting translated into different languages. I've seen even some locally run awareness advertisements be wrongly citing information, or just plain wrong. Unfortunately, this is likely to continue to happen, as it has done throughout history.

I agree with NeuroticFish though. Most people are referring to the person when quoting the name, and not the username of the account. I've talked about it with people who aren't familiar with Bitcoin, and I assure you that my pronunciation of the name is wrong, but people still can get the context of what happened, and if they have the motivation to research it themselves, they'll come across the proper name as its documented enough throughout the internet.

Just because someone on a forum is misspelling the name, doesn't really carry much weight.

Well donations are generally considered a good thing I would think. The issue is, not everyone would feel great about receiving them. Generally, charities are doing it for the poor or those that have experienced misfortune. A donation to a forum is to help aid the running costs usually, and donating to a specific rank, i.e moderators might have good intentions, but those receiving it might not feel great about accepting it.

I don't speak for all moderators or staff users, but I've said personally I'd feel a little weird about receiving a donation for the reasons stated above. However, I don't think I agree with you that donations need to be for a strong reason, there's plenty of examples of people donating Bitcoin for those that have been helpful answering their questions. Albeit, probably much more rare these days, a few years ago a lot of users had donation addresses.

I do think its a great idea in general, but I believe there are far more deserving things to focus on. Obviously, other moderators might be in a total different position to myself, and might actually have a need for the extra money. I appreciate the gesture nonetheless.

Its actually quite simple to make mistakes when copying, and pasting anyway. If you need to send to multiple different addresses, and you work in a rather large workspace its simply to miss a key, and assume you actually did copy the newly highlighted address, when in reality you haven't, and because you are familiar with the address itself it will likely go unnoticed.

I get your point, that this is probably enough. Since, the chances of an attacker having a nearly identical address is close to none. However, I personally always check each letter/digit. This is just a habit I've developed, since if you are taking the responsibility of being your own bank, you should probably consider the weight of that. Unfortunately,  because of our culture, and the fact we've started to rely on banks for many years now, we've become acquainted with short cuts, and getting other third parties to assure everything is correct. This develops complacency, which I believe is one of the biggest threats to anyone's security, no matter who you are. In fact, its probably more dangerous as you become more confident, and assured with Bitcoin, since that's basically how complacency works. In the beginning you are probably checking every letter/digit, and your heart is pumping the first time you send that transaction, and check it on the Blockchain to make sure it actually was sent correctly. Then, once you develop a confidence, you start checking less, and less as its a time sink.

However, wallets don't have a built in function to protect you from complacency. Well, they kind of do; some will prompt you whether you mean to send it to x address, but as we are human, and are already susceptible to complacency, most will just click okay without actually checking anything.