Neither do I, but the ann does not come from him, but from Shanghai People’s Court, although I think it is better to assume that if they announce this, it is because they somehow have the approval of the President or high authorities of the state. With the policy they followed after being one of the first countries to adopt Bitcoin and its mining, I don't trust a simple statement.

Google has changed the world and has been very useful to us, to the point that we have adopted the verb googlear. Not everything is rosy, however, and a mega-corporation that handles so much data and exercises censorship in a covert manner is not my cup of tea. Although it remains to be seen how I would handle it if I were the CEO. I am not referring to results, but rather that sometimes we criticize decisions or policies that if we had the power to make decisions we would surely act differently in at least some cases than we do now.

I think I discovered it back in 1998 and immediately stopped using the others I was using, Altavista and Yahoo search if I remember correctly.

This is the point I have been making lately. Bitcoin's history is very short and it was born when the 2008 crisis began to recover, with 0 rates. It has not experienced a major crisis since then and in those that have occurred, such as the COVID and inflation with rising rates, it has reacted poorly. So, I am not so sure that if we get into a crisis like 2008 or the crash of 29, Bitcoin will go up while everything else goes down. What I do believe is that if, as a consequence of the crisis, rates are lowered, when the Bitcoin starts to recover, it will probably be the asset that will rise the strongest.

I trust lovesmayfamilis although in this case I think the red tag is unnecessary. There is no trading risk and it adds nothing to the neutral tag. Nobody is going to hire OP for a signature campaign if he just copypaste from ChatGPT. What happens is that, as it happens most of the time in these cases, this habit is just the tip of the iceberg and nutildah has already discovered that the OP is most likely part of an account farm.

People use credit cards to finance everything, so it is not surprising that they also use them for gambling. But it is not only that, nowadays access to credit is very easy, I know people with their salaries garnished for having taken instant loans for gambling and not being able to pay them back because they have lost the money they bet. The problem with credit cards is the high interest rate, but those who gamble with financing their gambling with credit cards end up as those who finance it with any other type of credit, in ruin, foreclosed, and/or with wages garnished.


It is normal that if this market is growing, so are the people who get into debt for gamble, besides, as you say, it is in line with what is happening in society, where getting into debt is the most normal thing to do.

OP, if I were you I would lock the thread. Just so you don't continue to accumulate opinions against your idea. You have had an idea, about which people are mostly against and now it is time to move on.

Of all the responses most are radically against it, and a few say that some of what you say makes sense but they don't see the need for it. You can add one more to those who are radically against it, mine. This forum is fine showing replies in chronological order, there is no need to change it nor would it be positive at all.

Simply that if you try to do several things at the same time you are going to have less concentration than if you do only one, therefore you are going to gamble but and potentially lose more money.

In poker playing more than one table can boost your winnings but playing too many tables can reduce them, so you have to find a balance. In the same way it is recommended that you do not turn on the TV or check email while playing, as you distract your attention and your winnings will be affected.

I believe that governments are not interested in providing financial education, as in general they are not interested in providing financial education, as they prefer people to be stupid stuff consumers and indebted. I don't think they even think about it.

The curious thing about gambling education is that if it were given and done well, it could kill the industry or at least drastically reduce business, as long as people understood concepts such as expected value. And I don't think it would require an extensive syllabus either. For someone who understands basic statistics, it doesn't even take an entire course to understand the mathematics behind gambling.

Obviously nay.


That has happened to me too, what I realized just when I published the post or when I reread it some time later and corrected it, but if we go through my post history I wouldn't be surprised if there is some case that I missed and didn't correct. JG tends to write long posts, and to quote within multiple quotes, so it is easier for that to happen to him.


Lol.

As far as I can see you don't understand the basic principle of supply and demand. Bitcoin demand has been growing since its inception, with some ups and downs, but over the long term it has clearly grown. If demand remains constant or increases, which is what will continue to happen for the next few years, and supply decreases, the price increases. Halving reduces supply. Therefore, Bitcoiners expect the price to continue to rise, albeit with volatility because this is not a straight line.

So far Bitcoin returns have far outpaced inflation because it has proven to be the best financial asset in the world since 2009. And so we expect it to continue to be. I don't know if something else will be created in 10 years that will be better than Bitcoin but as of today it is unrivaled.

Waiting for the OP to open a thread titled "Bitcoin is a scam" in 3, 2, 1....

To obtain a 70% profitability with Bitcoin trading in two days is to have been very, very lucky. What awaits you is much worse than that. You remind me of the fish that sit at the poker tables, have incredible initial luck and think they know how to play, only to end up ruined in a short time afterwards.

A 70% in a month would be to have already had a lot of luck, so imagine in two days. In forex, a return of 5 to 10% per month is considered good, but think that almost all traders lose money.

Bitcoin has supposedly changed your life because you have earned $80 in two days with incredible luck. How heartwarming.

Do you really believe that? I think that nowadays he doesn't capitalize on anything anymore, because MSTR continuing to do DCA is predictable, monotonous. Yes, he brings out the news that he has made another purchase but that doesn't influence people's thinking as much as it might have done in the beginning. The opposite would be true, however, if he stopped buying or even sold, which would be shocking.

Not a bad plan. Personally I do similar but I do not plan to sell most of the coins but much less. I simply take the opportunity to accumulate at times like this, doing DCA and when we are above 69K I will sell but until I have an amount of Bitcoin with which I am calm the plan is to continue to accumulate through the cycles. Maybe in a couple or three cycles I'll have enough Bitcoin and I'll just hold it and sell or spend some of what I have.

You have to think that above $69K all the Bitcoin I have will be above the purchase price, so it is a good time to start making partial sales.

If the icarus cards are, as I understand, physical cards that have to be sent to me by regular mail, count on one less. I don't want anyone to know my address, and until recently I had a post office box but recently cancelled it. I guess I'm not the only one who thinks this way, so I think 16 for 20 or so participants will be enough.

I guess the logical thing to do is count as participating only those who sign up, as iwantmyhomepaidwithbtc2 comments.

So the more accurate title would be, "How I lost $120K that I borrowed."

Assuming what he says is true, I don't know what he expects us to do in this forum because if the scammers are exclusively on Telegram from here we can't tag them or anything. Already normal tag them is not much use because it happens after they have scammed and then they do not reappear on the forum.

In the end this (apparent) scam is based like many others on exploiting basic emotions of the scammed, such as greed.

There is not as I explained in my previous comment. Or put another way there can be all the correlations you want to make up if the sample is small and there is nothing more to support the supposed correlation than one thing has happened after the other a majority of that small sample of time.


Well, the purists would tell you that Bitcoin was not designed for centralized mega-entities to go hoarding, no matter how much of a Bitcoin influencer is at the helm.

That's for sure. If we want Bitcoin to be massively adopted and the price to continue to rise we need favorable regulations and inevitably the use of centralized entities to buy and sell it is going to continue. With the current usage it is not going to magically happen that people are going to become aware and move to an exclusively P2P use.


Not a chance. Nowhere in the world would people go on strike if they banned cryptocurrencies. Except for workers of some companies that had to close and things like that, but nothing massive for sure.

I don't quite see the conclusion you're drawing, it's neither a big milestone in what MSTR is doing which has been doing DCA Bitcoin for a while now nor do I see that supposedly helping adoption. When we talk about adoption we talk about more and more people using Bitcoin and this is the same billionaire buying Bitcoin through his company as he usually does.


If you saw that the price pretty often went down after I farted, would you also say that me farting is not a buying signal?

I'll put it another way: past correlations are of little use in guessing the future and if they are of any use at all it is because the sample is large and there is more to support the hypothesis than a certain regularity in the sample.

Zero percent chance of success? Since I saw that naim027 and his known alts are allowed to run wild, I believe everything in this regard. It is far from being 0%.

This guy was unbanned after plagiarizing and not banned again after knowing that he ban evaded:

naim027

These are known alts:

Crypt0S0ul

Dic3L0v3r

AnotherAlt

If you notice the last of the alts has been pretty active for all the red tags it has.

So seeing this no wonder NoorulHuda insists, it doesn't cost him anything to bump the thread from time to time.

But in that case, shouldn't casino support have contacted the OP to tell him that they are conducting an investigation into the matter? I think that would be the logical thing to do, and it doesn't seem that they have said anything to him, although perhaps with the anger he has, they have contacted him and he hasn't said so.