I'm curious why you think anybody would believe that you are capable of developing anything of value, when you're stupid enough to think that your identity or even a contract is sufficient to guarantee that you'll pay back the $1 million investment?

There is a reason loan companies won't provide any funding if you don't have sufficient collateral. Do you think you could go to a loans agency and ask for a $1m loan, and then be like "ok, here's my name and address... Where's my $1m?"

Absolutely delusional.

You've got a zero percent chance of finding investors here, and anybody that is dumb enough to invest deserves to lose their money. A fool and their money are easily parted after all.

I understand the desire to win free money, but 1,000 satoshis is the equivalent of literally pennies.... What's the point of wasting your time to win pennies?

Even the worst paid jobs pay far more, and you can often earn more simply from farming faucets all day if you absolutely had to.

Can somebody explain the draw here?

This is practically the same as the burn mechanism many coins use to incentivize growth.

I don't think the mechanism in-and-of itself is necessarily enough to ensure a token or coin will appreciate in value simply because the supply is lower.

Supply and demand-based appreciation only works when the demand outstrips supply, and I'd imagine that's unlikely to happen for a cryptocurrency that is trying to force appreciation rather than building utility value.

Then again, looking at how BNB has pumped as a result of its burns + increased utility value, it can work under the right circumstances.

The longer it takes, the better the chances for Wilder.

He's currently recovering from a bicep injury so that should take several months to finish up. He also needs to learn how to actually box, which will obviously take an incredibly long time.

I doubt either benefit will drastically improve his odds of winning, but he's obviously not equipped to go in there and finish a job he failed to do twice before in his current state.

Hopefully his injury takes longer to heal and Fury can fight AJ inbetween.

Congratulations to Playza23, who's absolutely killing it on Roulette today, scoring some back-to-back chunky wins despite registering just 3 days ago.



I'm sure we'll be seeing more of this player on the high roller board.

Can you share the site that has the negative carry-over?

Generally sites with a decent house edge of 1-3% will only RARELY be in the red against a player, particularly when you consider that they have maximum bet limits in place to minimize their potential losses.

I don't really see how even the absolute luckiest of players could ever put a casino in the red for over a year, unless he found some sort of exploit to literally drain the bankroll. I think there needs to be some investigations into exactly what happened in your case, since such an occurrence is extraordinarily improbable.

Here's the situation.

Any absolutely shit exchange running an IEO will only be able to run the absolute worst quality IEOs — including those that will almost certainly fail and/or are an outright scam.

If the exchange can't even build up its own reputation and user-base with whitehat means, why would it be able to do so for a third-party project?

I would personally stay well away from any IEO launched on a basically dead exchange, irrespective of the claims it makes. Remember, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, accept nothing less.

There is too much accumulated difficulty to recover the oldest burnt coins, but theoretically, addresses could be cracked by a sufficiently powerful quantum computer with an efficient pathfinding algorithm.

This would go for practically any address though, not just the BTC burn addresses.

As quantum computers become more of a threat, Bitcoin will probably need to update its proof-of-work protocol to be quantum resistant—though I imagine even Bitcoin miners in future will be using quantum computers, so it will just be about whether there's enough qubit power vs cycle power in the future.

I don't think we're anywhere near $300 at the moment.

Ethereum has struggled to hold even $250 for the last three months, and it only recently just broke above $200 after tensions surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic died down.

I believe ether will stabilize at its current price point until we get closer to ETH 2.0. Then we'll probably see a Cardano-esque pump, simply due to the hype that appears surrounding the new update.

That said, I do expect the update will be delayed until late 2020, so we'll probably have to hold off until then.

Looks like this is the cause of today and yesterday's pump. People are always counting their money before PayPal have even made an announcement yet.

It is more likely that they're just going to offer some simple checkout functionality for certain websites, rather than roll it out as a currency on the platform.

I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't just for apps or something using Paypal payment processing technology.

Jesus, it must have taken some serious computing power to generate that vanity address.

Or did it arise some other means? Like, was it built into the Bitcoin, similar to the Ethereum burn address (0x*)

Edit: found out how it arose, more information available here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=136362.0

Why do you set challenges like this? It just sets unrealistic expectations and forces you to place risky bets that are almost certainly going to fail at some point.

I'd suggest setting a more certain challenge next time, something like 10 days, 10% challenge, or 30 day, 50% challenge.

Pulling off 10% in 10 days consistently is already an incredible achievement, especially if you compare these returns to that achieved by professional traders. Stack the odds in your favor, not against yourself.

So basically, you're trying to tokenize a contract? Similar to what Spencer Dinwiddie is doing with his basketball contract;

https://decrypt.co/9303/nba-player-tokenize-34-million-contract-sell-shares-ico-sale

Not a new concept at all, but there are challenges involved, since these tokens would be considered securities. In the USA at least, only accredited investors would be able to buy them.

Even the bounties that are so common here on bitcointalk are a similar example, where people essentially tokenize their efforts.

I don't appreciate welcome offers one bit, most of the time they are stingy attempts to string the customer into losing as much money as possible on their first visit.

You typically find that the platforms offering a variety of welcome offers, bonuses and all that jazz usually have a higher than average house edge, and/or they're desperate for players so they look to fleece whoever they can.

I have never seen a genuinely attractive welcome offer from a crypto casino. The moment you read the small print, you soon find out that you've been duped and have to roll over your balance a million times before you can claim your bonus.

Options are more complicated than futures IMO.

I think people should just stick with trading futures, since they're automatically settled at maturity, whereas options can difficult for noobs to grasp—especially if they're noobie enough to keep getting rekt in a market that is almost perpetually bullish (except lately).

I haven't yet come across a site that makes BTC options accessible to novices, Deribit certainly doesn't do the job.

Popularity is rarely aligned with usage.

Although most people support the utopian ideals of Bitcoin, far fewer people actually use. Conversely, practically everybody in developed countries uses their bank account, whereas even the unbanked don't use Bitcoin simply because they lack access to the internet, computers or a stable source of power.

I would bet that there are no countries in the world where Bitcoin user numbers exceed central bank users, probably less than 2% of people use Bitcoin, compared to around 80% for banks.

Mansions are also popular, but few people have them.

Selling something doesn't automatically mean that you're damaging the market. There's a reason why market makers exist, and why liquidity is extremely important for any growing asset.

If everybody was holding, there would be no liquidity, so there always need to be sellers—they're actually helping to fuel the growth by providing liquidity for the active users.

Ethereum has a higher TPS than Bitcoin, but ether isn't designed to be a cryptocurrency. It's designed to be gas that powers the distributed computer behind the EVM.

Right now, Ethereum is more efficient as a means of payment, but that's more of a side effect than intentional.

Paying for things with Bitcoin is like paying with digital money, whereas paying for things with ETH is like paying with digital oil. It works, but it's not the right way of doing things.

What's the point of wasting your time updating this every single day?

Have you considered the value of your time here? The time you waste updating this post probably cancels out the profit you've made that day.

Just update it every week or two and bump the thread, nobody is interested in seeing the day to day gains (or losses) you're making since it's not easy then.

I suggest updating it weekly or biweekly and then calculating an annualized interest rate based on this. Then we can just compare the interest rate changes over time to see if the trend is going up or down.

It would be even better if you just use a live google sheet or something we can check, that would be far faster for everyone involved.