i agree in spirit, but we're sadly entering an era where bitcoin exchanges are increasingly being classified as financial institutions (ie banks) and money transmitters by governments. the FATF (which is really just a front for the USA government) has also been pushing its "risk-based approach" to AML/CFT quite hard.

whether we like it or not, proximity to so-called "risky" services (according to chainalysis: P2P exchanges, mixing services, high risk exchanges, and gambling sites) is therefore a problem for compliant exchanges:



so we should expect exchanges to increasingly target the low-hanging fruit and close their accounts. that's the mission of the FATF's "risk-based approach"---to get financial institutions (and now bitcoin exchanges) to stop doing business with "risky" customers.

besides gambling sites, wasabi wallet coinjoins are probably one of the lowest hanging fruit of all. until the implementation is less obvious, i don't recommend using them. use a mixing service with superior liquidity and less obvious algorithms.


both cases = wasabi wallet. https://twitter.com/RonaldMcHodled/status/1222195787112673281

limpers and minraisers are basically sweetening the pot. when i have a 3-bet worthy hand and i have multiple guys like this in the pot, i like a big 3-bet to isolate one of them.

this is how i see it: they are giving us the pot odds to bet big. meanwhile, i am giving them the pot odds to fold. that aims for the sweet spot where only one of them (if any) will call.


in big stack/slow blind games, 4-bet ranges were a lot more interesting to contemplate. most tournament structures these days leave us short/mid-stacked most of the time (unless you're crushing it), so 3-betting often has a big "do you want to make your stand here?" kind of psychology. pot odds and pot commitment play a big role.


i'm curious, why'd you play it so weak? i think we have a healthy stack to do more fishing with. he could be on a (non-AA) pocket pair that didn't connect, broadway suited connectors which missed, a weaker ace, or worse. people are fairly liberal with preflop 3-bets these days.

i prefer betting in post-flop, or maybe check-raising his weak c-bet. see how scared he is of that ace.

as played, i might bet-call the river, assuming he doesn't do some crazy RRAI or something. based on preflop range, i figure he's unlikely to have flopped or turned a straight/set. we can probably put out a modest value bet on TP2K at this point. (in b4 villain rivered JJJ )


i assume you had KQ here? your hole cards are missing, but i'm pretty sure from context. suited or no?

this call looks a bit dicey based on my usual preflop ranges tbh. but there are (higher variance) strategies that probably justify it, especially if suited. unless he's been jamming in my face repeatedly and/or showing trash hands, i think i'm raise-folding preflop. what did you put him on before you called?

lots of hands here, i'll look at the others a bit later.....

+1. anyone who doesn't want to get blinded out should just register late. i don't mind registering early myself (and maybe blinding out) because i wanna get more people in the game.

@efialtis, is there any way to add money to the prize pool?


same thing happened to me. for anyone who can't see the poker section: you need to switch your primary currency to BTC. otherwise it will remain hidden.

in fact, i was barred once from opening the poker room from a canadian IP address. the issue was resolved by logging in from a mexican IP address. so there's some more food for thought!


sounds great. as you know, i love me some post-game hand review.

i prefer your usual technical analysis vs your fundamental analysis. interesting commentary nonetheless.

the initial selloff in stock markets felt panicky but we've already seen a solid recovery over the last two days---monday's down gap was completely filled. the markets are reacting positively to news that outside of china, there have been no deaths and very few cases in general. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/28/world/asia/china-coronavirus.html

wuhan is completely on lockdown, so hopefully we're already turning the corner on this from a public health angle. while the number of infections in china compares to SARS (which itself subsided quickly), the coronavirus has killed only 1/3 as many people (133). people seem to be blowing the numbers out of proportion based on worst case scenarios.

since i can't find any evidence, i can only speculate. i don't see anything obvious besides perhaps him having trust inclusions that you didn't/don't like (like tecshare and Vispilio).


isn't that just saying "trust me, i've been right before"?


personally, i add people to my trust list where i want to see their feedback + those they trust by default. i exclude people for the same reason. is that provably malicious or deceptive?


+1

calling me ignorant doesn't change the fact that your claims are not self-evident. you're essentially arguing from authority, saying that you don't need to justify yourself to anyone.

i've researched the reference you included; it does not appear to prove anything. you say that Kalemder is engaging in "manipulation" and "chicanery"---how, just by having mutual trust list inclusions?

perfect description of the situation. i'm baffled by the reference post. it proves nothing. if you don't like someone's trust inclusions, then ~ them. that's long been established as the appropriate response. negative DT2 feedback should not be based on such baseless speculation.

it looks like nullius got kicked off DT2, but Kalemder 's account still has one seemingly undeserved DT tag.

i read through the leibowitz complaint. (yawn!)

i assume they are all pretty similar: bitfinex is supposedly liable for losses traders suffered because they were allegedly operating an unlicensed MSB, laundering money, and engaging in bank/wire fraud.

tbh, i'm not sure what the standards are with these kind of civil statutes. i'm also not sure if the same jurisdictional standards apply as the NYAG case. it was all less than compelling to me, but that's coming from someone who appreciates the wild west crypto economy and rolls his eyes when losing traders cry "market manipulation". i also think one should never have assumed bitfinex/tether---or any exchange---was fully backed to begin with.

much of the complaint was filled with speculation, then they focus on the $850 million shortfall from 2018 and subsequent lack of 1:1 backing for USDT as the "smoking gun".

the thing is, that doesn't prove that USDT was un-backed in 2017, during the period in question. so all in all, i'm not sure how strong these cases really are.

all i'm hoping for are some more gems like this:

taproot/schnorr will run at layer 0. CT could in theory too but there are strong reasons it won't (bloat and lack of support for consensus change).


taproot offers the beginnings of that. amounts and output linkability are still unaddressed at this time, but basically everything under the hood of a transaction can be hidden. cross-input aggregation (once implemented) will further provide strong fee incentives to drive users towards schnorr-based coinjoin and/or adaptor signature-based mixing transactions. wallets could offer these as automatic/default mechanisms. if most of the network is using taproot, these are pretty huge privacy gains for everyone.

unfortunately, we can't approach this issue as if it were day 1. as gmaxwell pointed out, there is uncertainty around being able to deploy even mundane consensus changes---let alone ones that are actually contentious.

just to clarify, i didn't say/mean that one trustworthy act makes someone fundamentally good. the act itself is fundamentally good. this was to meet your "proof of good" condition:

i just feel that acting honorably in all business dealings and squaring all obligations ought to mean something. can we agree on that? if not, what are the proper metrics, in your opinion?

it's like, you're a bank and someone with a perfect history of repaying every debt asks for a loan. is their perfect history a basis for their financial trustworthiness? or should they be looked at exactly the same as any bum on the street?

but (presumably) he was entrusted with those funds, and he proceeded to act honorably. that seems fundamentally good, right? why would it matter what externalities led to the situation?

if not stealing from others despite the opportunity =/= trustworthy, what would you consider to be the basis of trustworthiness? what metrics do you use?

if only 0.1% of people check trust pages to learn this information, that means inaccurate/undeserved trust scores won't be questioned by 99.9% of members. that only lends credence to the idea that DT members should not throw around red trust so lightly.

counter feedback is the only thing one can do when they see inaccurate/undeserved feedback (besides ~), so nobody should be surprised that it's done.

even if it doesn't restore the person's trust score, countering still seems useful where there is disputed negative feedback on someone's trust page. it at least shows there are two sides to the story. an undisputed red mark doesn't convey that.

a surprisingly gracious move by suchmoon.

exactly. it's a nice thought, but there's no fair way to keep them from blinding out. everybody should just play as they normally would.


4pm GMT (or later) please!

saturday vs sunday makes no difference to me, but pushing it back 4+ hours or forward by 2+ hours would be a million times easier for me. 2pm gmt is right in the middle of my REM sleep.

i'll add a couple mBTC to the next prize pool if we can find a slightly more convenient time for me. (can pay the top players out manually if it's too difficult to do it through SB's interface)


lol. so close to cashing!


yeah, i'm in. note my time preferences above. but chances are that i'll make it next time either way.

has there been discussion about cross-input aggregation and when it might be implemented? i was under the (apparently mistaken) impression it was gonna be included with taproot. it does not appear to be included anywhere in BIP 340-342.

+1 on everyone you mentioned. all of them are very rigorous, but each has a very distinct style. the speculation board is super lucky to have people like dmwardjr and exstasie giving away their TA for free. i've been in paid groups with much worse analysis.

one more analyst i'd mention is xxxx123abcxxxx. he's been spot on several times re major cycle tops and bottoms. he says he's too busy to make a new thread for 2020 but he still pops by his old thread to offer occasional forecasts:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5128394.msg53681405#msg53681405


EW is easily butchered, which leads to faulty analysis. it takes years to master the rules and especially the guidelines to intuitively feel out the market. i recommend sharing your EW counts here so we can offer some critique and see where you might be going wrong.

indicators like RSI and MACD are about as accurate on BTC/USD as any other instrument. taken alone, they are never enough to reliably forecast the price. they offer one piece of the puzzle---specifically, they gauge market momentum. you need other pieces too: bar charts or candlestick charts so you can recognize bullish/bearish setups, a "big picture" cycle analysis strategy like elliott wave, measures of trend like moving averages/EMAs/channels, and volume to help confirm the dominant trend direction.

now bloomberg is calling bitcoin "a safe haven" because it rallied into the coronavirus outbreak: Bitcoin Bolsters Its Claim as a Haven With Rally Topping Gold’s

all of a sudden, they're pointing to a 60-day positive correlation with gold to make the argument. anything to explain a rally! the news media is hilarious.

reading between the lines though, there's been a notable positive shift in mainstream media sentiment. these bullish headlines tell me that sentiment is really beginning to shift in the bulls' favor.

damn---i always give people like this too much credit. i would have called down here but there are similar spots where i know i've been bluffed out of the hand.

how would you play it if you were dealt A7 in the CO? check behind the turn? still bet-calling the same way?

any interesting hands from the private forum game? not sure if SB even has hand history since i can't find it. good job cashing. i slept through it and donated the buy-in..... hopefully we can push back the time a couple hours next time!

looks like SyGambler took it down, congrats!

unexpectedly, i got home shitfaced drunk 3 hours before the game was supposed to start. not my typical saturday night. oops! who was sitting to my right, stealing my blinds the whole game?