Then wouldn't Paypal just ban them for violating T&C then? In the first place, I think the reasons for the bans that were officially recorded would be under that (since I don't think they'd be dumb enough to state politics as a reason). I'd rather have a law that enforces the transparency of reviews done on banned accounts instead (with a group governing the fairness of the transparency rather than Paypal themselves). If it were indeed violating T&C then proceed, if not well then they have to restore the account.

At this point though I'd just completely avoid using Paypal. There'd probably be better alternatives out there.

I'm actually quite fine with it, as long as they're of age and can properly take responsibility for their actions. I'm more inclined to let them have their freedom as long as they can take responsibilities properly, so on top of said freedom I can give them some responsibilities they need to handle. Carrot and stick approach so to speak. Problem in this scenario is that they're too rich that no amount of "responsibility lessons" could do it since well, money speaks for itself.

I don't think switching games will be all it needs. The streamer needs to find a sports betting-centric casino or a poker-centric casino based on the announcement, which doesn't tick most casinos since almost all of them have a variety of dice and slot games that Twitch has banned (yes, as long as any casino contains these games, they're not allowed to stream it).


As you said though, Drake just needs to switch platforms but honestly, a loss in the audience is inevitable with that imo.

Idk at 19 in that specific scenario, I'd blame both child and parent. 19 is an age where impulsive actions are rather of the norm, but it doesn't excuse you from the fact that you let yourself get carried away by a multitude of factors to do something dumb, in this case like this (and technically breaking the law if what OP said is true). Yes, the consequences would be pretty light since they're rich a f, and this is where the responsibility of the parent comes.

As other people have said, it's not even about gambling, it's about taking light of your actions since the consequences would be close to non-existent due to their family background. There's nothing to discuss here imo, it's just the rich acting rich, and nothing we can do about it, they're rich after all (and influential as well most likely).

Yes. You won't be able to operate in countries that require licenses though but other than that, pretty sure you should be able to freely open a casino. That is ignoring all the stuff about reputation and security and whatnot since a license is a kind of like a basic requirement (for most people) for casinos to be at the minimum trusted. Not all casinos without licenses are scams though, it just took time for said casinos to actually be trusted and have a good enough player base, so if you're prepared for that then you can go.

Yes. No matter what, the norms of society have basically labeled gambling as a negative kind of thing that most people would be set back upon knowing that you actually do indeed gamble. Sure, some people might ignore or don't mind it but the pretty sure the majority still view it negatively. I see no need to rectify it, it is for a fact that you gamble after all and as long as you gamble within your own limits without damaging anyone then I don't think you need to mind what others think.  

If it damages your reputation pretty sure it should only last a short while as long as no one is purposely spreading negative rep about you. You can always clarify it anyway if someone approaches you about it.

Education naturally doesn't ensure a job. It actually factors in more than your skill, which includes your social capability as well as knowledge on knowing how to find jobs that are well paid. Education is like a single pillar that you build, but there's a lot of self-study/research that you have to do to build the other pillars. Heck you can build the education pillar part yourself given enough time imo.

I think the biggest thing education gives you is a certification that you went to one, and that's it. It sets a certain criteria of what to expect from you so companies hiring can easily see what you can and can't bring, letting them make an easy jdugement of your capabilities.

I also gambled quite a bit back when I was in high school but it never really went past that level like OPs. I've spent money yes, pretty big compared to my normal but never enough to well bring ruin to my current state then.

I guess the biggest damn day of my gambling was on my first paycheck, basically spent it all in gambling back then (I was pretty invested after winning considerably before then), which basically made living through the month pretty hard. Still better than most I guess, but it was still a rather difficult time for me that has relation wtih gambling.

I don't think you need to go in-depth that much, especially if they're just employees that accept the payment. Probably make a separate kind of seminar of sorts if you want to fully teach them about Bitcoin, but if it's just payment, then create/adopt a simplified method like qr scanning so that your employees have a much easier time (same as customers), as well as future employees. No need to overcomplicate it but as I said, you can teach them on a different occassion.

It's not like they know what fiat is at it's core tbf, they probably just know it's adopted and accepted globally.

Afaik they can? But they've had multiple methods of countering this such as having multiple decks for each session, which basically ruins the chances of card counting actually having any effect throughout the entire game. If we're aware of it, then casinos are most likely also aware of it and with that being said, I don't think it even matters if you tried it, casinos themselves probably know that it's a futile effort. But still, I would err on the side of caution in these cases, since as I've said, casinos know it's futile, so in some form you should as well, so might as well not try it.

Interesting, I don't think I've ever heard of it (not that I've heard much of twitch in the first place tbf). It's also odd since, well, why were the streamers hit instead of the staff? That's kind of more of an internal issue after all imo.
Honestly, one idea I've always had for people to know that it's a gambling stream (and be irritating as well) is just to put it in a big red banner in the front saying "GAMBLING STREAM, WARNING!" kind of like those kinds of obnoxious adds. Directly warns people and also irritates usual gamblers to the point of leaving. Damages the streamer yes, but I think that's the cost for streaming gambling in the first place.

Favorite Casino: None really, I play wherever I think is good from time to time.
Wagered amount: I'd say secret but I actually have no idea since I've played on multiple sites.
Profit: Never been rich because of gambling so I'll just say 0.
Most played games: Crash, Black Jack, Poker & Sports

I'd go anon on my wins and losses, I don't even remember most of them tbf. I've mostly stopped trying to save them even after like a few months of playing, It's better for my mental health since I don't have to compare it with my every session.

I regularly buy in so that my wallet increases, but with the dips recently I have been buying in more sometimes. It's pretty irregular though, but it's not to the point where I'd call it buying it all in. I'd highly avoid doing that even if you consider at one point that it's the bottom, proper risk management should always be done imo.

On the topic of dip, if it goes down below $18 again I might just buy more. Every dip right now seems like an opportunity after all.

Highly doubt it would put an end to the winter, or add any more for that matter. I'd compare it to how more exchanges opening up doesn't mean anything in the grand scheme of things. It is a nice way to spread adoption, though it's going to take a long time before it could matter. I also think crypto winning over fiat is not going to happen, both living together without doing anything to each other is what would be for the best imo. Highly doubt the Government would let fiat die (nor could they kill crypto tbf).

Fundamental. I do try technical analysis but it's more like on a basis or something similar, I never set it as something that's going to happen as guaranteed but I also never put it past me to acknowledge the chances of it happening together with a bit of understanding about the results of fundamental analysis. That was in the past though, nowadays I just hodl and DCA, trying to read the market is stressful and most of the time of me trying to understand just makes me misunderstand it more.

Idk, I think AR would be better in terms of casino experience, and would probably be a lot quicker in terms of improvement. AR would add the experience of that 2d/3d feel to the real world which imo is a lot easier compared to adding that realistic 3d feel of the world towards 2d/3d. It's the difference between implementing a system in a developed world and developing a new world. Plus, it makes you go out.

I'm honestly more interested now in AR development with what they showed.

Not possible. I mean it's China, I don't think we have anything more to discuss there. 

Just because Bitcoin was brought along within the discussion of the topic doesn't mean that it's going to be a threat to it. They're still both mediums that people can use, sure if Bitcoin was under the government then yes it might've been but it isn't, it's decentralized, so it can't kill or be killed imo. What digital dollar threatens is fiat though it's might be more apt to call it an upgrade/migration to a better system. Just imagine it as the world having their own currency (compared to a currency set by someone else for the world).

Well, I guess that's a plus in some sort of form since it makes those who are correct in actually reading the market profit more. I wouldn't pull down instinct sometimes since a good call can sometimes just come from a gut feeling, especially if it was backed by the current news and whatnot. Heck just determining the general trend imo is more than good enough, and any specifics after that are just a bonus to taking in more profits.

I'd also just put emotions under control, they exist as a form of warning sometimes but if you know how to control them and if you believe in what you've studied/analyzed then in the first place I don't think your emotions would take control of you.

I spend most of what I deposit (since I deposit on a regular basis most of the time) since I'm fully committed to spending all of it for my enjoyment, but whenever I say win big, I tend to leave and basically just sum it up to equate to my regular deposits monthly. It's pretty random I think but pretty small most of the time (less than a $100). So I guess I've never really withdrawn directly, but indirectly it did reduce the amount I deposit to play with, hence "indirectly". If I do stop to play I just leave the money there (not that it's much in the first place) and do not really withdraw it till the day I want to play again.

Gacha games basically swapped out the concept of receiving money for spending money, instead replacing it with cosmetics, art, whatever you call it. Then they add their own odds to it which is basically really really bad if you see it from a gambling perspective, but is rather normal from a gaming perspective.

It's addicting yes, but it can also be controlled since they, well, give out free stuff. I wouldn't consider playing the game itself addicting/gambling, the game itself gives you chances or opportunities to grind up and earn currencies you can use to get stuff but spending money to get a specific item (Which in most cases, happens to EVERYTHING that they release) can basically end up a curse of you spending all the time. It can be considered addiction to some extent if you can't control your finances, but well it's much lighter than gambling imo.