Yes, this is a typical mistake made by new projects announced on the forum. Not buying a copper membership to make the OP of the thread look decent. With the competition in this section, making mistakes like this takes away a lot of points, but the OP has time to fix it and edit the OP once he/she has the copper membership.

Another thing I would avoid is "trusted" if there is no one trusted in the casino who can vouch for them by leaving positive feedback for deals they have done or positive experiences that convey trustworthiness. That you say of yourself that you are trusted does not mean anything to me, because scammers also say it.

It's the same thing that happens to millionaires like Mark Cuban, who after selling a company and retiring for a while decided that spending all day playing golf wasn't his thing.

And it's good that they made the decision to go back to work because having many millions, all the time in the world and being bored can land you in a detox clinic, or even more, dead from overdosing.

In the end the good thing about being rich and being able to retire is that if you feel like it you can retire for a season, like a long vacation that can be a year if you want. Then when you come back you work in what you like, what motivates you and with the schedules you set for yourself. It is very different to work for someone else on a fixed schedule that they impose on you and because you need money to eat than to work on something you like the way you plan it yourself.

I do not know what Satoshi will think if he is still alive, but I would say that he will not be entirely happy with how things are going but if I were him I would not be pessimistic either because there is use of bitcoin as he devised it, to escape the clutches of states and central banks, basically P2P, but in the minority.

It is true that in a large part no, because as you say many people buy it to get rich, through centralized entities and without understanding the philosophy behind the creation. But if the price is where it is, it is also precisely because of that. If bitcoin had been reduced to P2P it would not have gone over $1K in price, and I think the maximum ATH today would be much lower. The path to mass adoption has come hand in hand with this.

That's for sure. There are two things that increase tax revenue:

1. Ease of filing.
2. Low rates.

As in many countries neither of these two things is given in the field of cryptocurrencies many people do not declare them, as there is a certain ease of holding and trading cryptocurrencies without your state knowing about it. Now as governments see that they are missing quite a few taxes out there, in many cases what they have come up with is the opposite: the same difficulty to file taxes, KYC obligations everywhere, and high fees.

Bitcoin dominance has ceased to matter, at least for me, from the moment dominance has to be split between 30,000 shitcoins and the Bitcoin. If there was only one that came close, I would be more concerned, but if it was Eth, I wouldn't even worry about it because it serves as the basis for many other shitcoins.

In the next bull run some will hit the lottery with the shitcoin of the day, while most will lose a lot of money and those of us who invest in Bitcoin will have decent and safer returns, although not as spectacular as some shitcoins. But we will have a pristine premium asset, if not the best.

When Musk finally took over Twitter there was a lot of criticism and I preferred to wait and see what he did because a guy who has amassed that much net worth is no fool and it was clear he had a plan. But smart and rich people also make mistakes sometimes and right now I'm getting the impression that they are making mistakes, and even more with the idea of charging for the accounts.


We will have to see how this affects the overall picture. If there is another platform that does not charge and takes away a lot of X users, it will also take away crypto enthusiasts who do not mind paying a fee.

You are probably right.


Well, according to Satoshi's initial idea that many people share, but some times an invention differs from the idea of its creator.


I do not see the parallelism with securities, because in the markets you can trade securities and commodities indistinctly and that does not tell us anything about the nature of them.


I would modify "if you can't beat them, join them" to "if you can't beat them, tax them".

This whole thing looks unprofessional to me.

They better try to correct mistakes but there are several complaints in the forum from people saying they can't withdraw, so that when they supposedly can because the house has solved the alleged technical issue, they have gambled and lost the money. This story is not something new that we hear from casinos, but the most reputable ones don't do it (neither on purpose or by negligence).

It seems that they rushed to announce on the forum something that was too big for them. But let's wait and see if they really manage to correct their mistakes. If they do things right, an online casino is a cash cow, or a crypto cow if you prefer.

I agree with the spirit of the OP, just pointing out that the famous "HODL" came from one who was drunk and misspelled the word. Plus the last 20 posts on this forum are about shitcoins, so you can see he didn't HODL so much finally. This thread in comparison is much more serious and many newbies would do well to take note but I fear that most if they find it will be after they have made the mistake.

The problem with that is that there are so many shitcoins and more are coming out all the time. The last time I looked at CMC I think there were 28K, but now they have changed the way they indicate it and I see that it says , me not really knowing what this refers to.

It seems clear to me that pump and dump shitcoins are still in the growth phase, and we are not even in the bull market. During the next one it seems to me that the shitcoins market explosion will be brutal and will evaporate the money of the unwary who invest in them. Some retail investors will make money with them, of course, but like a lottery winner, although those who will make money for sure will be the ones behind the projects.

Of course, you, like me and the whole forum pay the cryptocurrency taxes that apply, each and every one of us. We declare the earnings from the signature campaigns as income tax, depending on the country we also register as self-employed for it (no matter if you have another job) then every time we pay with bitcoin even if it is $20 we have it well noted to declare it in next year's income because it is a taxable event and if when you spent that $20 the price of Bitcoin was higher than when you collected it from the signature campaigns, or you bought it or got it in another way, you will have to pay taxes for it. Then we also pay taxes for every exchange we make in the currency exchange section, which you can sometimes see in feedback trusts "I exchanged 100USDT for his Bitcoin, he went first."

And let alone everything that moves in the gambling section, which is obviously also all declared as it should be. Only a few clueless people like the OP and a few heartless people do not fulfill these obligations, but I would say that the majority of the forum does.

Well, I will answer regarding my thing, which is poker.

In principle, I like it in poker or in any casino that there are responsible gaming tools and that they work.

As for poker specifically, what I don't like is the tendency of rooms that used to be poker rooms like pokerstar to have not only included the casino but to promote it more than poker. Also that in terms of poker specifically the rooms have been removing some formats such as Sit & Go or raising the structure of blinds so that they make them more roulette-like, where the student has less margin to win in the long run and instead the rooms are more profitable.

Also the increase of rake and decrease of rakeback in the last decade but it seems to have moderated lately and in some punctual changes there have been timidly advantageous changes for regular players.

When you say "rents" do you mean interest? I don't know if I misunderstood you before as I thought you were requesting that amount to pay the rent. It doesn't matter much because you're not going to get the loan anyway but if so, if what you mean is that you can pay good interest, my argument from before doesn't apply. What would apply is to ask you why if you can pay good interest you don't save and self-finance instead of borrowing from strangers.

Although I guess the most logical thing to do is to think that what you say is a lie and what you would do is to take the money and disappear, that's why no one will lend you here.

I don't take him seriously for predictions either, as I rarely take almost any prediction seriously anymore. I have an idea of where the price is going to go over the next couple of years and I don't think any analyst no matter how sophisticated has powers to guess the future beyond what we all know: bitcoin is a scarce commodity, that over time it will continue to increase in demand but also decrease in volatility and returns, that halving halves supply and the like.

From Kiyosaki it's fine to learn the basics, and then evolve further. For someone starting out in personal finance I would recommend reading Rich Dad Poor Dad and learning more from there. Once you have done that, learn, you realize that some of what he says is even laughable, like buying RE to rent is passive income, lol, when it's not very passive.

In general there is no hope for you as a new member but other than someone who needs £750 to pay rent and promises to pay back £900 by not explaining anything else the obvious question that arises is what money he intends to pay that £900 with in addition to next month's rent. Having to go into debt to pay current expenses indicates financial ruin and no one in their right mind is going to lend money to someone who is broke.

Maybe Timelord2067, who I see has given you a merit for I don't know what, will give you the loan. 

I forgot to say earlier that I think there are a lot of tax efficient gamblers on this forum because they don't declare any of their crypto bets, and I would be the vast majority of them don't get caught. Someone playing from regulated Europe or from countries where gambling is prohibited with vpn and/or Tor to get past the blockades and play in unlicensed crypto sites or licenses from places like Curacao is not going to shoot himself in the foot by declaring a prohibited activity to their country's treasury.

That's just the way it is. If someone like my aunt is going to end up buying Bitcoin at some point, she's going to do it through her bank and deposit it there, just like a lot of people on the street. Even billionaires who buy large amounts usually do it through centralized entities and deposit it there. Today I have seen the case of Mark Cuban, but Saylor at least initially said that he did it this way, but he did not shy away from the idea of self-custody in the future, which I do not know if he has already done, but in these cases I imagine that they want everything transparent as they are under scrutiny and also the possibility of suing a company if something happens with what they have there.

Another thing is that I personally plan to avoid banks like the plague for Bitcoin purchase and custody.

Well, you only talk about Anglo-Saxon countries and I am going to add the socialist Europe which is the most heavily regulated in the world in terms of gambling.



https://www.egba.eu/eu-market/licensing/

Let's put this in a more global perspective.



https://slotegrator.pro/analytical_articles/where-online-gambling-is-legal.html

So, without knowing exactly what happens in all the countries of Europe, in most of them taxes are paid for gambling, which the user has to declare in the income tax return.

You're right. You say so yourself. Poker should be played as emotionally neutral as possible, although we are human and playing completely rationally 100% of the time is impossible. But the best players have great emotional control.

Have you tried to play several tournaments at the same time? That way you will be less bored. I'm talking about online tournaments, of course.


Again, yes. Put a solution to it. Don't repeat the same thing that you know doesn't work for you.


Start by playing on several tables, as I mentioned, I have the impression from what you say that you play only one.

I don't understand why they only put €16,000 as a goal, then, and not €32,000, I guess with the emotional shock they didn't think about it properly. Don't they accept donations in Bitcoin, apart from gofundme? For a previous forum member I suppose it would be logical but I imagine that the wife or the person who organized the gofundme may not have a clue.