Its unfortunately the world we live in. Most people in the world, will blindly trust their favorite celebrity, and lose countless money because of it. I mean, just take a look at the recent Twitter compromise, and how many people blindly followed the doubling scam that occurred. Instagram, used to be the worst for these sort of trends, but it seems Twitter is now the place for posting things with political motivations. I've also noticed Youtube infulencers/creators are now getting much more comfortable with ramming sponsorships, and brand deals without doing their own research on just what they might be talking about. A few big Youtubers have been caught out promoting scams for this exact reason.

I wish people just wised up, and understood that an infulencer has a price, and they will push any agenda on you if their price is met. Of course, there are some influencer ith a bit of integrity, but they are far, and few between.

Agreed, I don't think I'm that fond of mass gatherings, and structured days. I'd rather have a casual outing, and maybe the possibility of joining in on activities if I wanted too. My idea of a Bitcoin meetup might be totally wrong though, I tend to think its going to be like comic con, when in reality its probably just a pub meetup, and a general get together. I'm not sure if going to a meetup would even be that exciting unless, you had some interesting people there to make it interesting. If its just to talk about Bitcoin to your local community, then there's the forum for that.

To me, the its the only plausible way of doing it. Like I've previously touched upon, each company that is capable of advanced space technology has a specific thing they're good at, and they aren't a jack of all trades. SpaceX has had to much experience with manned missions as an example, while Nasa has had a lot of experience with manned missions. Although, SpaceX has been successfully developing groundbreaking technology. It seems you've got the private firms currently pushing the boundaries, while you've got the government owned ones which have the experience which will be vital.

Having the technology is one cog in the system, but running a successful mission is far more than one cog.

Rule number 5. This is something I would extensively reiterate to everyone. Bitcoin is probably one of the easiest currencies out there to make a mistake due to the amount of decimals there are. Unless, you're the filthy rich of course, you'll likely never need to use multiple digits with fiat currencies, but with Bitcoin sending $71 can be easily sent as $710, and isn't that noticeable unless you triple check it. I think we've probably all made small mistakes such as putting the fee to high, or the actual transaction amount.

Cryptocurrency is a rather diverse topic, and Bitcoin alone has been endorsed, and equally poked at by arguably bigger organizations, and people of the world. The criminal argument is usually the most obviously quoted part of any argument against Bitcoin, but as you've mentioned its completely unfounded as every currency that exists in todays age is not only used by criminals, but abused by them. Cash, is much better to use if you're a criminal, than Bitcoin which is stored on a public ledgers for anyone to see. Cash, is pretty much impossible to track. This article, and video might be older, but its the same argument I see from people who aren't familiar with Bitcoin. "Oh the currency that enables criminals" Its rather annoying, and becomes tedious to actually recite the same information over, and over again....just like I did above...again.

I'm assuming you're talking about a particular gambling website, what one is it? Since, to be able to verify it they should have everything that's required to verify it on their site. If they simply just state that its provably fair without....providing the means to prove it then they likely aren't being completely transparent.

Its incredibly hard to make a prediction of the growth of technology, and therefore our capabilities in the near future. So, although Elon Musk's predictions might seem a little far fetched, and don't get me wrong they are. I think it certainly might be possible in the lifetime of a few users on this forum.  Obviously, Elon is a businessman, and he knows how to make money. He knows that going on Joe Rogans podcast was a good move, and he knows exactly what to say to increase his sales. However, Elon does have a good track record of delivering what hes said he will do. Although, its usually a little longer than the initial prediction.

I don't personally believe there will be a singular effort in the space race, and sending the first people on mars. It will likely be a joint effort among the major companies. Elon will likely be given a contract by NASA, and NASA will work together with various other countries space teams. So, a space wager might be a little difficult to come up with if they were all going to contribute in some way of form. On the American point of view, NASA is probably the more experienced in manned missions, and SpaceX has been making good progress on the engineering pioneering such as the reusable rocket. There's loads of different companies though, and its hard to predict how much each will be involved, but I do believe there will be multiple involved.

Who would have thought that gambling, and religion was so intertwined. I'm not an expert in this field, but I'm pretty certain that gambling is frowned upon within the catholic space these days. Although, we do have to remember that a lot of modern day ethics, and morals are based from a religious stance, even if you're not religious in itself.

Exactly the reason why I would personally recommend against the idea of using personal identifiable passwords. If you're including something in your password that you personally like in your life for example, that could potentially be a weakness in itself. Its much more recommended to use a password that is as randomly generated as possible, since the human mind isn't exactly great at creating true randomness.

I know there's a few Bitcoin gambling sites that cover the six nations when it starts up, and I do believe the six nations is resuming later this year to complete the last tournament that was postponed around march time this year. The odds seem to be worse in comparison to some of the fiat gambling sites. Unfortunately, I can't get a complete list of these at the moment due to it being a seasonal event, and some of the ones that I believed to offer it are not showing it currently. If I'm not mistaken the dates have been confirmed, and they are somewhat soon. 

This probably isn't a very popular decision, but at least scammers are largely advertising their scams publicly which can be sort of moderated by the community. Therefore, they tend to take a more relaxed way of going about it. If the forum disallowed it completely, and removed them (which would be a can of worms in itself, but I won't go into that) it would likely operate on a more stealthy way, and the exposure, and therefore the awareness could be far less. Make that as you will, but I don't think there's a perfect solution of moderating scams. Its not a case of that we want, and encourage scams on the forums, no one wants that. Its just that its so difficult to effectively "control".

Just like anything, this is likely through the user making a mistake by downloading something they do not trust, or by getting social engineered. There's definitely a pretty solid way to protect against this, but it depends on the individual. Someone could even use a virtual machine or dedicated machine if they really wanted to protect against this. A bitcointalk channel would likely be targeted due to the precieved power it has, and what another user could do to pretend to be the channel, but  unless youtube is compromised itself, this should be fairly simple to protect against if you follow strict guidelines on what you are viewing, downloading, and who you're giving your credentials too (ideally no one). As stated above, I do believe a "channel manager" or whatever can be added to manage the channel without having to many permissions, and not logging in via the credentials of the main user.

AFAIK, the way that he gained access to these accounts wasn't anything particularly impressive. I haven't been keeping up to date with it, and I've only skimmed over it, but it seemed like it was either a social engineering a representative of Twitter which allowed them to gain access to the internal tools, or they simply compromised one of the staff of Twitter. This might have been a simple way of gaining access, and there's no reason to believe that this was a particularly impressive feat. I know that the prosecutor suggesting that this teenager wasn't the typical teenager, but without specifics its hard to draw a conclusion to what it meant by that statement, and in what context.

Although, I think this teenager will be made an example of. Its very rare for so many high profile accounts to be hacked, and used as a outright scam in a small amount of time. Also, what's the verdict on the stolen money? How are they going to be handling that situation?   

Personally, despite the frequent requests to reduce the donation amount required for a rank I've always respected the fact that it hasn't happened, and the stance has been relatively firm.
I'm one of these people who have started to boycott some big companies including Google as I find the way they handle things, and specifically the privacy concerns to be too much to justify using their probably superior services to their competitors.  

Its used for a variety of reasons ranging from comedy, editing or remaining transparent when withdrawing a statement. There is no consequence of deleting your own posts if you so wish, however sometimes that can make threads appear to make no logical sense once a part of the discussion has been deleted. Therefore, take that into consideration when deleting your posts. We've all deleted posts, and its a quite common occurrence, and there's absolutely no consequences unless of course you're trying to hide something, and someone points that out. If you simply want to delete a post you've made a mistake on, then you could or alternatively edit it. You aren't required to use any of the strikethroughs or any other formatting discussed here.

I mean doesn't this pretty much confirm that when we start colonizing mars in 10 years time that Bitcoin will be the official currency of the colonists, and the martians born there will not even know what cash is unless its specifically taught through the mars education system. In all seriousness, its a pretty cool gimmicky event to say we've done.

Differs from moderator to moderator. Some will ignore reports of images being too large, but others will attempt to make the thread a little more readable if the image is too large. There's no strict rule of it due to it being pretty subjective, and therefore is the interpretation of the moderator reviewing it.

However, you can always give Frodocooper a courtesy message to see why its was edited.

I doubt they will, unless the forum took the extreme action of converting all the forum to something like serious discussion which I equally don't see happening. I think both serious discussion, and Ivory tower have proven useful, and a sort of "safe haven" for those trying to escape the usual replies from those looking to build up their accounts and/or earning from signature campaigns.

Depends on how the media spin it. There was several other big names included in the compromised list; Elon Musk, Bill Gates, and Jeff Bezos. I'm expecting those guys to get hit the worst in the news as there's a bigger target audience, but no doubt Bitcoin will be portrayed negatively for the hackers asking for Bitcoin donations.

I know that there's plenty of adverts on Facebook that are scams, and I believe they only get reviewed if people actually report them. Although, I've seen many scam companies continue to advertise despite the negative comments, and the probability of being reported by several users. Youtube's review team on uploaded videos is fairly strict, and their automated systems tend to catch a lot of the bad eggs. I imagine they operate on a similar level to Facebook with adverts though. I have seen some shockingly bad adverts on Youtube as of recent. It used to be just professional shot videos from established companies, but I've literally seen adverts of youtubers promoting their channels in recent months. So I believe they may have changed a policy somewhere for this recent influx.

The hack would have minimal effect if any of the transaction fees, as pointed out by others not a lot of transaction volume is associated with the addresses, and if the figure above (400) is accurate that is nothing in the grand scheme of things. Although, a little off topic was it confirmed that it was an API hack, as I believe there's no information given by Twitter at this time.