|
After a while, we as a community must realise that legalisation is sometimes just a cover for excessive regulation.
There is really no need for bitcoin to be legalised for it to reach its full potential. After all, it is decentralised and does not need a central sanctioning entity to endorse or back it up in order for it to function, which is its entire premise in the first place.
I think that given the history of Pakistan with a very restrictive and hostile attitude toward bitcoin, it is very likely that this will be a case of revenue-grab by the government as opposed to any serious attempt to integrate bitcoin and blockchain tech into the mainstream economy.
|
|
|
|
Have an edge over yourself
It's not funny to gamble tbh, some people do it for fun but where's smartness in losing your money? Will you be called smart? No, right? It's better to only use and invest your bankroll in those games over which you have an edge. If you are sure about the game you are betting, then only use your 1 unit on that game, otherwise no need to gamble based on half (or 0) knowledge because we are talking about smart gambling and managing our bankroll. This assures that you have higher chances of winning over losing, and this edge will only help you gaining much more profits in the long run. If you don't know about a game, or yours is a few days ahead, just don't gamble and wait some days and let your expected game arrive. This is key. If you don't have an edge or a perceived positive expected value then there is really no point in managing your bankroll. You're going to be hit with the same negative long run EV in the long run. The reason for bankroll management is to minimise your risk of ruin and thereby dodging the variance that comes with a game of chance where you know you have an edge. And this is not only limited to sportsbetting - it applies to any AP across poker, BJ, etc. If you are purely playing for fun then I don't see the point of rigidly managing your bankroll, just go out there and yolo. |
|
|
|
|
I feel as though a lot of economies, especially during this pandemic, have already adopted at least some facets of MMT.
Debt monetisation is rampant in most countries already which undermines the independence of the central bank. Indeed, if the central bank is freely buying up all the government bonds that are available, it is truly no different than just having the government control the money supply.
The difficult part of MMT that I feel will be hardest to implement will be controlling money supply with taxation alone and the jobs guarantee. These will be quite difficult to get society at large to accept at the very least.
|
|
|
|
And also, any ideas or strategy/tricks/advices to maximize profits and minimise risks by playing this kind of gamble?
Lotteries are notorious for their high house edge and low RTP. I would not recommend them at all. You are much better off playing other provably fair games such as dice and blackjack which have consistently low house edges of 0.5-1% if you play with perfect basic strategy. If you are truly an advantage player looking for a way to make money off a game in the long run, then lottos with rollover pots could potentially create positive EV situations when the pot gets sufficiently large. However, these instances are rare after various state lotteries were exploited in the US using this method (search up on youtube if you're interested). |
|
|
|
Man, one week without reg season action felt like a month, i guess it's time to cook some crazy parlays even though we have just 6 games scheduled for today.
By the way, Miami's spread up by a point to -6.5...interesting to see if it will go back to -5.5.
That is the ugliest shot I've ever seen... Anyhow, anyone playing the championship futures? Did the Reggie Jackson trade sway the odds of clippers winning the title in any way? Is it even worth betting on the championship outcome or is it better value for money to parlay in playoff games? |
|
|
|
Hi everybody!
I have an idea for a new type of Bitcoin lottery.
Instead of a lottery where the winner is chosen randomly, I would like to see a lottery where the player can build some strategy to try to win the pot.
The lottery can be called "prediction lottery", let's say there is a period of time, for example, 1 week, after that period 1 player will win the jackpot. Everybody can buy a ticket for a fixed price, for example, 0.001 BTC, instead of choosing some random numbers like in most lotteries, the player makes a prediction of how much the pot is going to be at the end of the period of time. The prediction that is most close to the jackpot value, wins the lottery. Because it is more difficult to predict the pot at the beginning of the round than at the last minute, we can introduce a more expensive price of the ticket for last-minute players.
What do you think? Would you like to play a lottery such as this? What improvements or variations do you suggest?
Sounds like a very interesting lottery, I'm sure some economist will try to come up with a model to simulate it though  The thing is that people will be so discouraged from buying tickets early that I think there isn't enough motivation for anyone to join until the very last second - in which it becomes very prone to "sniping" and other forms of manipulation of the pot. I doubt that practically, this is going to work. But it is an intriguing thought experiment. |
|
|
|
I'll give it a shot. [b]Loan Amount: 0.003 [/b]
[b]Collateral (if any): None [/b]
[b]Repayment Amount: 0.0035[/b]
[b]Repayment Date: 7 days if accepted [/b]
[b]BTC Address: 3Ec3AEfsAFb2emBdn2MDMuS5hqzJ1w4c99 [/b] Denied, sorry. Thank you for following all the rules, though. |
|
|
|
I understand.
The rules are definitely rigid and I was just testing my luck.
Perhaps though in the future we could see some sort of OTC market for derivatives on both crypto and real life assets - that would be awesome to see. Of course it's difficult to picture such a set up working for a large volume given all the trust that has to go into it.
As much as it's more cost saving to directly deal with the other party, there's gonna be loads of trust issues. Without an escrow or middleman, you can see the problem arises on who goes first. No KYC means if anything goes wrong, you're screwed. 😬 Actually, what I find is that a lot of the sites with no KYC in the cryptospace at least are much more efficient in running their business and provide much better customer service than regulated entities. This is evident in both exchanges, and dice sites. I don't know if there is a definitive correlation here, but it's certainly not fair to assume straight away that a site is not trustworthy simply because they don't do KYC. And yes, OTC for this in BTC is a far fetched idea - but with the way that bitcoin derivatives are blooming, I don't think it's an impossibility. |
|
|
|
You know Corona Virus is something that is showing motality rate even more than the SARS.
But in between all this economic, social , political crisis one can notice how it's integrating Nations together.
US is pledging to donate millions to fight this and more than 21 countries are sending medical supplies to China.
Even Indian President came out to Help China and they even are talking about rescuing the Pakistani Students from Wuhan .
This is really great , yes I know it sounds lame but countries are discarding their boundaries and working together , this is the system of government we should have .
This is precisely how the economic stability will be achieved.
I think this is the only good thing the Virus is doing.
What do you guys think ? Is this something that might show us the path of global Peace ? .
Firstly, who told you that coronovirus had a bigger mortality rate than SARS? That just misinformation. Secondly, I think it's too quick to judge based off what the media tells us. Just because there seems to be co-operation between China and the US and other countries doesn't mean that internally, these countries may actually be in conflict. Look beneath the surface of what you're told. |
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, this kind of behaviour is quite rampant in the cryptospace.
Since this is a third party exchange that you are talking about, they are able to set their own withdrawal fees as opposed to adhere to the current average fees that are actually needed to get confirmations on the BTC network.
Most exchanges if you dispute this figure will likely tell you that there are costs associated with processing deposits as well as withdrawals, which is why their fees are beefed up. This is true to a certain degree, but when you see exchanges charge 0.0005 BTC when the average fee is in the 1k sats, it's certainly not fair for the users.
|
|
|
|
It's definitely easier for me at least to stop while I'm ahead.
I suggest that crypto gamblers have a setup whereby any BTC that they withdraw in winnings to a fiat bank account are kept their - and they only play with the profits that they make or whatnot. That way, you are sure that even if losses accumulates later down the road, there is too much effort in converting the fiat back to BTC to feasibly go and get more coins to chase your losses with.
But both these activities are just as equally destructive. Have a good mindset and you shouldn't ever have these issues.
I actually dont think that would do much to curb the issue. What's to stop them just playing at a fiat casino? I actually think it might make the problem worse, since they'll then be forced to play at a casino that is even more accessible, thereby fueling the addiction. I think there should be some sort of bank account option, where users can opt to block deposits to known casino sites. That might work to increase the barrier to entry. I beg to differ in this instance. Fiat casinos generally are much less accessible than crypto ones, and the barrier of entry are way higher and betting is not real time all the time. They also have a much bigger house edge compared to crypto casinos on average, which are all factors that can deter gamblers. Of course you could self-exclude from crypto dice sites, but what good is that when you have such a vast array of alternatives that you can choose from? Realistically it's not going to help much. |
|
|
|
There is a huge community enrolled with cryptocurrencies which love being decentralized but yet are using centralized exchanges. That is only because the DEXs might not provide us with major benefits and also the volume on such exchanges is comparatively low as they also posses the risk of being hacked or any such kind of risk. We could make the dex a better place to trade if a mass volume of community moves towards the decentralized exchanges.
Centralized exchanges have been dominated the markets but we should try to remain decentralized if we are related with cryptos unless until cryptos are been accepted as a regulated mean of payment globally.
As I've said before, the lack of adoption of DEXs isn't because of the fact that people don't want to use them or reject decentralisation. Quite the contrary, people in the cryptosphere want to embrace decentralisation, but they are forced to use centralised exchanges because DEXs simply can't fulfill their needs in terms of liquidity, speed, and customer support. Most people understand the risks involved with storing their coins with a third party and most would want to avoid it. But right now, there is simply no feasible alternative, especially for whales. |
|
|
|
|
Nice list, OP.
Just a suggestion though, maybe include a personal judgement on whether or not the p2p exchange has high/low liquidity and whether or not the spreads are high?
The problem with most of these newly formed p2p trading platforms isn't the fact that their service is crap, but rather because there is a lack of buyers and sellers listing ads. You can often see 10% spreads on the most common payment processors, which is quite absurd.
|
|
|
|
|
Relax and take a chill pill - this short term correction was needed and expected.
The gains that were made were definitely unsustainable over the past few days and an adjustment was going to come as a matter of time - there's no if's and but's.
I'd actually expect prices to slip a bit further down before retesting the $10k resistance, which this time I think will turn into support for future rallies. With the halving upcoming I think that there is definitely reason for optimism, albeit a somewhat subdued sort.
|
|
|
|
|
It's definitely easier for me at least to stop while I'm ahead.
I suggest that crypto gamblers have a setup whereby any BTC that they withdraw in winnings to a fiat bank account are kept their - and they only play with the profits that they make or whatnot. That way, you are sure that even if losses accumulates later down the road, there is too much effort in converting the fiat back to BTC to feasibly go and get more coins to chase your losses with.
But both these activities are just as equally destructive. Have a good mindset and you shouldn't ever have these issues.
|
|
|
|
|
Absolutely. We've seen 12k pose significant resistance before and that essentially brought the pump late last year to a halt. A lot of people expected a breakout after 12k was breached but at the end of the day, there wasn't enough bullish momentum to keep it going.
If 12k was indeed breached this time round, it'll send a very bullish signal to the wider markets and will definitely cause FOMO of some degree.
It should be a matter of time - but corrections along the way are absolutely normal.
|
|
|
|
Are there any that don't require KYC? Or do they all require some degree of it.
If there was a way to short stocks with the same ease that you could long/short BTC perps then I think a lot of people what be doing it.
With these traditional forex brokers I feel like that either they are super shady or they have high fees, and/or have a lot of regulatory hoops that the user has to jump through before they can obtain a working account. That really drives away a lot of potential users imo.
The ones that I've used require some sort of KYC. Mainly due to regulations imposed by CySec, FCA and the likes. A forex broker without any sort of licensing is like a sitting duck waiting to be shut down. You must understand that KYC is important for them to avoid getting in trouble. If the client commits money laundering, who do you think the authorities would go after? Definitely the broker first. I understand. The rules are definitely rigid and I was just testing my luck. Perhaps though in the future we could see some sort of OTC market for derivatives on both crypto and real life assets - that would be awesome to see. Of course it's difficult to picture such a set up working for a large volume given all the trust that has to go into it. |
|
|
|
|
At this point, as long as you've got a hardware wallet that you can lug around and some sort of p2p trading platform account (LBC or paxful is fine), you can literally travel the world without carrying any cash and worrying about exchanging your funds at every stop.
In fact, you'll likely save a whole bunch in terms of exchange rate spreads, because of how competitive BTC to fiat rates generally are compared to fiat to fiat.
At the end of the day though, what would be even better would be direct acceptance of cryptos, but unfortunately it is still too early for that.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
