Yeah, lets not jump ahead of ourselves. It's being reported by newspapers, rather than reputable sources. Until it's proven, we won't know. At the moment, it's just allegations, and there's no way that they've already proven this.

It's a Qatar, so there's going to be all sorts of drama's over the next month. We already know what's happened prior to the event, which has obviously fuelled these allegations, and I suspect it won't be the last. I do think there needs to be a thorough investigation done to the people who died building the stadiums, that goes without saying. However, I'm not just going to believe allegations based on that.

As long as it's fairly substantial, and contributes to the discussion it doesn't matter all that much. The problem is, we've got several threads being bumped that were posted back in 2013, 2012, 2011, and with no actual contribution whatsoever.

Contribution doesn't just mean being substantial, and not be classed as good quality, but it has to add something to the conversation, and typically this isn't done a lot when you go a certain amount of time back.

However, there's plenty of examples of users necroposting correctly. It doesn't always warrant a new thread, although I'd say in the majority of the cases it's probably the better idea.

Yeah, I've got the impression over the years that theymos doesn't exactly care about much the forum is worth, but does care about the community, and how the forum is operating. Which is absolutely refreshing to see. I wouldn't think he'd sell it to anyone, and honestly considering how careful, and thoughtful decisions have been made, at least for the majority of the cases over the years, I wouldn't want it to go to someone that's buying it.

I believe theymos is relatively young, and doesn't seem to be a one to just go, and convert back to fiat. So, I'm pleased to think we'll likely be stuck with theymos for a while. This place could be turned into a absolute gold mine, and I feel like most other people would attempt to do it, and in return absolutely ruin the community we have here.

Anyway, I'll focus on this event now. Since, it's looming, and I haven't got any predictions out. Not sure if I'm going to be able to watch it, but I'll be skipping betting on the fights most likely. There's too many close calls, and hence why I've not got my predictions out yet.

Even the main event is a close one to call. If Spivak can grapple, and get his technical shots off without actually getting clipped, then it's a obvious bet to make. However, Lewis is deceptively fast, and I actually think he does catch Spivak. Unless, like I said Spivak goes straight to the wrestling, which is what I'd be doing if I was anyone going up against Lewis.

Chimaev also gasses out, and Colby has an impressive engine. I'm just not convinced he's strong enough to pose any threat to Chimaev, and make him work that hard. Could be wrong in that, but Chimaev takes it for me. Although, I think Chimaev will struggle against other contenders, and I hinted towards it yesterday, but I'd love to see a rematch with Burns, as that's a much closer fight than the fans typically give it credit for. It could have easily gone to Burns that night.

The only thing with the design of it, it's quite possible that it doesn't pass safety regulations in many of the countries. Seems like the US will be fine, but it was pulled from the UK for a reason, and I imagine it's to do with the design of it. Protection is all well, and good for the driver/passengers, but colliding with one of these is going to devastate any other car.

So, unless they come up with another version for the EU to pass safety regulations, I doubt this is going to be a reality in the UK. 

I doubt it. It doesn't look like they are seeing eye to eye right now. So, them reaching an agreement amicably probably isn't going to work. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the Glazers hit back at Ronaldo, and went looking for damages to reputation. It could potentially get really messy from here on out. Although, I imagine he'll just be fined, and they'll look to offload him.

When does his contract expire? I'd say that's the most likely option out of all the options, run down his contract, and he finds a new team after that fact. I do feel for the fans, and Ronaldo. He's been hushed out, but the fans have basically lost a legend. They basically idolized him, and I'm not sure if that'll be the case after this since he didn't just come after the owners, he seemed to come after some previous team mates too, which I found a little odd.

The only way of doing this safely would be chronological order since the more complex you make it, the more likely you're to make mistakes or forget it. I already think it's a little bit too complex, when really you just need to assure the physical security of your seed, and you'll probably be alright in the majority of cases. There's plenty of ways to mitigate the risks of storing something like this physically, without actually making it more complex than it needs to be.

Yeah, ultimately it's all an act to sell fights. Although, I just don't personally find him all that appealing. His skills are undeniable, but it's hard to support someone that just hasn't got that attitude that clicks with you as a fan. Conor was exceptional, because he seemed to do it all. He clicked with the fans, got in the heads of other fighters, and sold fights. Plus delivered on the big occasions.

Chimaev also got tested in that Burns fight. I actually thought Burns won it, but I can see why it was given to Chimaev. I think Burns learned just as much as Chimaev in that fight. Burns challenged him both on the ground, and standing up. I know Chimaev said he should've gone to the ground after the fight, but I'd actually fancy Burns there. Burn's skills are seriously underestimated, and I don't even know why, he's a likeable character too.

I was mainly referring to plainly written down, so I probably should've worded that better. I personally believe in physical, non digital storage. Then securing that physically is really your main concern.

As you mention, failing hard drives are one thing that's pretty unpredictable. However, also corruption, and not outright failure can obviously lead to problems too. Ideally, you'd have multiple non digital back ups, that aren't stored in the same place. However, not many people have the resources to do that, at least securely.

Any mistakes in spelling should be easy to rectify. You could easily just Google the correct spelling, unless you've made an absolute mess of things, but most people are competent enough not to do that. I guess the only exception would be a non English speaker, that's using the English word seeds.

For your later point, it's usually okay to do so for most people. Obviously, people have different threat models, and comfort levels. So, it's going to differ from person to person, and there's no real correct answer. I prefer the approach of not over complicating things so much that it introduces problems, rather than solves them.

Plain text can be fine. Depends how you store it, basically you need a back up that isn't just convenient, but also has a high degree of physical security. Therefore, the most important part about a physical backup, is how you store it, and what sort of security you implement. You can make it digitally as strong as you want, but if you don't approach the physical side of things with the same scrutiny, that digital protection could all be for nothing.

Luckily, generally most of us can devise a pretty good standard of protection physically without doing anything too fancy.

I've not researched this, but generally Crayon isn't known to last very long. Are you sure that this would last potentially decades? Nothing has been tried, and tested more than normal ink. Crayon on the other hand, probably wouldn't last as long, especially if it was subjected to frequent handling. Ideally, you wouldn't be handling it very often, but I don't know your setup so it could potentially be handled or stored with other important documents which could effect it.

I'm sure you've considered it, but thought it might be worth mentioning. I personally wouldn't want to use crayon. I'm sure if it's just white crayon it would be able to be seen via shining a light on it or holding it up to light, right?

Under Sol I believe he had something like 18 goals, which was only a couple off the top scorers of the league, in a very lacklustre United team. So, I don't think his performances have justified the treatment he has received. Although, I do think it benefited the team him being dropped, and I do recall a discussion in this thread about whether or not they should do it. The thing is, there's a right way to do it, and a wrong way. He probably shouldn't have been alienated like he was, and definitely had a role to play in the team even if that meant not as a first team player every game.

I imagine he could find a move elsewhere, he'd just have to drop his wage for that to happen.

I can't remember that, and don't use Instagram so I tend to miss out on most of the news outside of UFC coverage. I don't recall the UFC mentioning much about it, and maybe didn't see the interview at the time. Although, it's still a shock. To think that most fans were probably criticising him for pulling out of that fight, and he was dealing with something terrible behind the scenes. He must have found out just before the title fight then? Since, they wouldn't have made the title fight in the first place if they had known what he was dealing with.

Yeah, I very much doubt Lewis is going to show a different side to himself this late on in their career. He's a good knockout artist, and I personally believe he's beaten fighters better than Spivak.

As for Chimaev, and Colby I don't really have any interest in any of them. I know that might seem odd to say since Chimaev did look the real deal against Burns, despite being tested. I just can't seem to back him in any of the fights, and his personality doesn't really help him either. He's a bit like Mayweather, you watch him because you want to see him lose. I think a Burns rematch, and he loses, but that's just me.

In light of my previous post, if you fancy a proper gamble then the fight going the distance is priced at 6.00, although I do find it hard to think that Lewis lasts the full five rounds on his feet if he can't put Spivak out early. Lewis priced at 2.87 for a knock out is pretty nice considering his record. I'd probably go for the distance if it was a three round fight, but five rounds is a long time for these hard hitters. No point going for the bet of it not going the distance since that's only priced at 1.12 which probably gives you an idea of what everyone is expecting.

I'm tempted at 6.00 .

I think the event is actually a really good idea, which actually promotes a lot of good habits among the community. However, I'd somewhat agree that the sponsorships have taken away from that a little bit. The event doesn't feel like it's for the community any more, and that's no dig at the organisers. It's just the competition felt quite authentic, but when there's any financial reward available it seems to be a prime target for abuse.

It's a shame to see. I do think with the correct changes you can mitigate it. The merit issue was pointed out by quite a few users, and removing a vote is actually a decent way of going about it. Since, it only really effects the nominee if they decide to merit the user that voted for them.

That does pretty much limit the merit issue we saw previously. The preventing of old winners, I think was suggested with good intentions, I just don't think personally it's the best way of going about it. I do think most of the creases will be ironed out with the merit suggestion, which should make the sponsorships not get in the way as much as they did last time.

Exchanges should never go beyond what they have their own reserves, but they do. That's the real problem here. However, I'm quite sure what you're trying to get at here. Although, I wouldn't exactly describe the price of Bitcoin stable, literally ever. It's known for its volatility, and to some extent that's by design for now.

What's for certain is news like FTX isn't exactly great for consumer confidence, especially when we're trying to convince people that Bitcoin is a better alternative to fiat.

You can, however it isn't foolproof especially when it comes to malicious users manufacturing their own copies. Although, like I said this is a rather sophisticated attack which is beyond a lot of people's ability to actually pull off so the risk is relatively low.

I do believe most hardware wallets have tamper proof stickers on their packaging, and potentially the device itself these days. Again, not foolproof though. I'm guessing you could potentially contact the manufacturers, and see if the serial number matches up, although that would highly depend on the manufacturer, and device I'd have thought.