Idk, just the fact that he's relying on a single investment to make him a rich man doesn't seem correct in the first place already. He's probably not even looking to be a millionaire by looking at it years from now, he wants to be a millionaire as soon as possible already, which more often than not simply kills their investment early on. This is what I would consider as a gamble instead of an investment tbh.

Then there's the idea of thinking that buying a coin that's below the price of a dollar for 1 makes a good investment, well it's not. The original mindset he has should be changed imo, Thinking that an investment like Bitcoin which compounded investments 1000x in the past would happen again is really really minimal, one shouldn't even consider that such a scenario would happen when investing in anything. 

For investment alternatives, altcoins are always there, he just has to do a LOT of research not just on the coin itself but also on the team behind it, whether the project can even boom in the first place. Even riding just the initial hype and getting out should be enough to be called a success.

They're all the same regardless of what you call them imo. They're both a gamble with most of them having a higher chance of being an exit scam instead of proper investment. The rest can be seen as legit projects but don't really gain traction and then there's the extreme minority that grows in value due to hype which stayed for longer without any actual reason. I doubt they'd stop or leave the market scene, just like projects are being made left and right monthly, the same could be said for these types of coins.

They should, as long he has solid proof of the announcement of winners (whether it be via video, an official announcement, or whatever), as well as the lottery ticket that won. It also matters that said lottery should be a legal one though.

On the matter of experiencing it, I have to win first before I can 

It might honestly be a real tech accident of sorts, it happens, I just think it's impossible for it to not leave any traces whatsoever though so them avoiding it like this kind of seems odd. It might be for money though I don't think they'd shy away from paying it that much since they're a lottery company, they'd inevitably win in the long run tbh. Put a punishment, a very heavy one for law breakers like in this scenario.

And any other good investment can do the same, maybe longer but can still do it all the same. Bitcoin didn't actually do anything, people just saw its value and they judged themselves that it could grow into something bigger. Bitcoin didn't solve their problems or establish their businesses, it was those people themselves that did it mmkay? Let's not put Bitcoin as some sort of salvation since as much as many people won, there are also a lot of people who lost. A LOT.
Kinda funny how you pointed out points two and three and yet you want the world to make it "legal".

I think it's because they also don't really know the exact reason for the block. The message is usually just sent from the above in this case the administrative department of bitsler. It is irritating yes, but it's also probably pretty irritating to the team behind sending us all these emails.

@OP have you tried emailing the email on their site? it was

If so and the ones whom replied were those on your screenshots, then I don't think there's much we can do but wait. It'd probably be best to contact them again but this time organize everything that your account has from transaction histories, withdrawals, etc., so that you can prove that you are the owner and that you can show what you've done for your entire history of playtime.

If it wasn't though, then I suggest trying it first? I'm not sure as well if the ones who replied to you is indeed bitsler anyway.

Uhh isn't it more like a Play-to-earn gambling kind of thing? Now Idk if those are considered metaverse but what I do know about metaverse is a kind of central hub kind of sort where multiple worlds (3d or 2d) are connected and can interact with each other. A vast internet world so to speak (Basically Minecraft tbh, but that's a different discussion). It's rather different from what OP posted about since it's more of a game where mining is integrated into the system of the game plus a variety of gambling-related games. It's an MMO, but the currency, in this case, Bitcoin, is earned via mining through the game.

It's a rather interesting idea though. But then again if it does pop off, bots would simply fill it up and ruin the ecosystem just like any other play-to-earn games out there.

I'd probably consider CEXs for cases where a user is pretty new at it? They're pretty friendly imo in terms of letting users know how to transfer/convert their crypto to other currencies as well as transfer. It basically made stuff easier for your average joe. DEXs can also function the same albeit a bit more towards people with more knowhows (since they'd be a lot more confident compared to someone new). In most cases as well if someone has found a pretty comfortable service to use, they'd often stick with it and CEXs do this more often imo than DEXs especially on new users.

You do know you can create the thread once the review was, well, done...? What's the use of dropping a site with close to nothing to it 2 days earlier? Heck someone copying it from a different review site might do a better job of coalescing information. And if it was a 10 page text in the first place, pretty sure it's your teams fault for making it past that instead of properly arranging the information that they have.

There's nothing to process though, it's literally just the site you linked added to the poll 4 times.

Can't deny that. Op knows and probably many others as well know how casinos are simply asking for KYC for compliance towards regulations of each country so they can continue to run their casino, I mostly tried to go to casinos without KYC early on even if it was temporary but it just became a pain that I'd accepted it fully after some time. If a reputable casino were to pop out that would fully commit to having no KYC in their entire service then sure I'd go for it, but I hardly doubt it's going to ever happen.

As I've said in a previous post of mine, Investments and the like may seem like it's a gamble, but it's a calculated one. It does not rely on luck, it relies on factors that the investors themselves studied based on what can possibly be the growth of said investment and whether it would actually return something, unlike gambling which solely relies on luck.

A LOT of decisions in life can be called a gamble, even normal decisions can be called one since we don't have a guarantee of the result is what we expect it to be, but we simply call it decision-making because there's a clear difference between thinking about what to do compared to leaving it up to luck. It's that factor of thought that separates gambling from any other decisions we make. I wouldn't deny that luck exists in all decisions we make though, it's just we don't rely on it 100% or heck, even consider it as a factor when making decisions.

It usually isn't. At least from the casinos or lotteries, I've experienced they don't. The most that they reveal afaik was the location of the winner, and the most recent one was with the lottery issue in the PH where they revealed the number of users and their location afaik, but not their names. Casinos even more so, online casinos would at most reveal their usernames or something similar, land based casinos would only be known if you were on the spot and they wouldn't go as far as to publicly announce it.

If winners were shown willy nilly like that, I hardly doubt said casinos would have any users at all. A LOT of people want to be anonymous when they win big since a LOT of relationships tend to be complicated when one side suddenly earns a big amount of money at once.

I think in said scenarios then it's the casino's fault? That is if they weren't using bots. Afaik they should have some rules that do not allow the usage of bots for farming faucets and bonuses, just like in any other type of scenario where free stuff is given. Smarter way or not, bots are just not allowed in general. Heck, I'd also consider taking advantage of bugs as not being allowed, but those cases are rare anw imo. But other than that, they should be allowed to maximize the faucet and bonuses given since well, the casino themselves allowed it.

Mostly useful resources would survive and be required if a nuclear war happens. Yes technically Bitcoin would survive as long as one part of the internet survives, but it wouldn't really be usable, just like fiat. Methods of payment or transactions would probably move from such stuff to instead as I said, resources that can be used immediately. There wouldn't be any rules to transactions by then after all other than the most basic rule of all transactions, a trade of what you want to what we want kind of thing, and I hardly doubt Bitcoin, or any other similar type of asset like fiat, stocks, bonds or whatever could count as one by then.

If we want Bitcoin to be fully adopted by the world, then imo regulation is inevitable. This doesn't mean that the government would put Bitcoin under their control but rather they'd only set some rules for merchants that accept Bitcoin as a payment method that would inevitably kill some of what makes Bitcoin, well, Bitcoin. In itself, I don't think the regulations could do much, such as p2p transactions but if it was a centralized group/merchant, such as exchanges, then it'd affect it to some extent.

The only issue here is that no one really knows when the bull run starts/ends. Same with bear runs. Hence why people tend to overestimate and pretty much lose most if not all their investments. Another issue would be the cutting the losses part, if they were to do so they should've done so by setting a stop loss early on, or if not, if it was an asset that performs well in a cycle like Bitcoin, then I honestly wouldn't sell at a loss, I'd just wait for the cycle to repeat itself again.

Always keep in mind to only invest what you can invest. Running out of money due to investment simply means you don't really have a financial plan at all, which is a mistake.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5262141.0

Here's a list by BTCGosu. Other than the list, you can visit some of the ANN threads in the forum to make your judgment, but if that's too hard (since there's a lot tbh), you can probably start off with the casinos that most users wear in their signatures, then visit their ANN threads itself. It's rather easy to identify scammed or frowned upon casinos since most users that advertise scam casinos are negative tagged. Unresponsive, slow, or bad designing aren't so that's really up to you to find out and decide.

Most casinos ask for KYC during big wins or withdrawals, which is honestly a pain most of the time so if they'd do that, I'd much rather they do the complete KYC after registration. It just saves the hassle and straight up tells me that I NEED to do KYC to have a smooth sailing experience. Sure, no KYC early on might sound good but if you're planning to stay and play in the casino for a period of time, that idea isn't really for you but rather short-term players.

Ofc as much as possible if there was no KYC involved then yes, it'd be great! But the world ain't as kind as we'd like it to be.

I don't blame your friend,  there are times like that but I wouldn't really blame the game for that, it's just a matter of luck after all. Blaming something else to explain your luck is something rather natural since luck in itself is rather abstract.

1.) As I've said, it's all about luck. Just based on numbers it should be possible for someone to win a game, it's just a matter of "when", which limits most gamblers.

2.) Afaik I've mostly played card games like Poker and Blackjack, never really remembered how much I won, they'd probably be equal from what I lost or close to it anyway since I've never really went past that much from the amount I've spent. I think.

Well being reputable does significantly reduce the risk (but not remove it completely) of the chance of the casino being a scam since well, they already have a solid user base which thereby creates a pretty solid reputation for them, both security-wise and reputation-wise. It also makes it a lot easier to find some info to crosscheck since there'd probably be tens of cases where the casino was involved, either with users being irresponsible or with legit cases that were caused by mismanagement or bugs, finding those kinds of situations is in a sense kind of a review that can make you be at ease since you know the casino answers.

Pretty sure preferences about the UI/wallet/games comes after that tbf.

It's probably because it's an exhibition match, and we're still like a month and a half away from the fight itself. Pacquiao as well might not be naturally pushing for publicity with it, I don't think he needs it nor is it his main profession in the first place. The Youtuber himself also seems to only be popular on certain circles after all.

I do hope it's going to be a real fight, not just on Pacquiao's side but also on the other side. Took a peek at his YT channel and I saw how he has a few fights and showcases his skill. Also for those curious, there were a few uploads of the official announcement and press conference of their fight on his YT channel.