You're contradicting yourself lmao. "hard workers" then "let luck do the rest" isn't really what they did, they're hard work basically let them see or grab said luck/opportunity or whatever you call it. Without hard work, I hardly doubt successful people would exist. I won't deny that lucky people exist, I mean look at Fred Smith (FedEx), he gambled away the money left of his company when it was on the brink of bankruptcy and won, but that wasn't all there is, he used that money that he got from luck to create more opportunities for his business, which grew to what it is today.

Successful people don't let luck guide them, most of the time it can be said to be a culmination of all the efforts that they did in the past, which presented itself in a combined form and should be called opportunities instead of luck. Luck is a separate factor that exists, but isn't exactly a major cause of a breakthrough to a successful career, at least, most of the time.

The fact that she had the gall to even say that she invested in a brokerage and got scammed and yet refused to present any sort of evidence whatsoever is actually quite brave. I'm actually amazed that she still won, could've possibly made a profit if she stopped early on. People probably wouldn't have judged her if all ended well, but since it didn't, then she simply has to take the responsibility for the consequences of all of it.

Nevertheless, the fact that the money wasn't even hers in the first place and she used it for gambling is stupid already. I'm amazed the lottery let her go under debt just to bet, never knew that was possible (it isn't in my area afaik).

Can't exactly say objectively whether his decision to leave his wife for his career was good or not, but subjectively I'd say it's pretty dumb, it's been a long 23 years, and I think it was high time he took care of his family instead but hey, to each their own. There may be other reasons but well, we'd probably never know.

As for any investments he made, well, it is what it is. That's just how investments go, whether the reason was a natural market crash or because the team behind the project itself fucked up, those are natural risks that people naturally shoulder when investing.

Does it even need to in the first place? It'll get used if people want to use it, it won't if they don't want to, simple as that. Just the fact that Bitcoin is decentralized and CBDC is centralized already negates any sort of possible competition between the two imo, and CBDC is literally just fiat but digital (which fiat can honestly do as well). Let them do their thing, not exactly sure what CBDC's goal is (afaik it's just to digitalize fiat payments), but I'm pretty sure it's not anywhere close to wanting to fight with Bitcoin, or any crypto for that matter.

Imo instead of cutting it off just set a schedule. If you're unable to abide by it, make some forceful actions like setting up some sort of mechanism that bans you from access to whatever you're usually using for a set amount of time. Addiction in the first place stems from people bypassing any form of schedule and instead overinvesting their time to a certain activity after all, to the point that any time after a certain point obviously makes it very unhealthy.
And they offer a lot more in terms of comfortability if you have the money. I mean it is perfectly comfortable to play at home, but that's like the very basic comfort you can get (unless you're rich a f already).

I believe most licensed casinos need to prove at the start that they have the initial funding to support the casino, from its technical expenses to the possible pool of winners. In the long term the casinos will indeed pay winners with the losers' money, but that's simply how they generate profit so nothing wrong with that, but in the early days that's simply not possible, nor would they even be allowed to release their casinos legally as I said.

And it's not "lose more win less" but rather casinos simply take a cut that they automatically gain per bet, aka the house edge. It's a guaranteed source so that they don't only have to rely on people losing.

That was then. I was initially into crypto right before the pandemic, so regardless of whether it actually happened or not, I would've probably stayed all the same. I'm still into crypto even after that dump since, well, I know what crypto is now and what Bitcoin could be (or is already). I'm more into using it as an investment, though I have used it as a form of payment method in the past a few times, but since those cases are rare, I wouldn't really say I'm into crypto for that.

Naturally. In the first place pumps by altcoins are more often the result of market manipulation early on and boosted later on by the people who got fooled into believing the coin has actual value. There may be some other coins that pump naturally, but they're rather small in number and the majority of the pumps you'd see are actually just artificial.

I honestly wouldn't hope to find one, you're most likely to lose money than earn in those cases since you have to be part of the early birds in those types of coins. Staying for long might also make you end up losing more instead.

You'd at most get general info with regards to technical terms and then some vague answers to very specific questions. I've tried it, not specifically in trading sadly, but across various sample problems and case scenarios, it has never really given me a proper/solid answer when it comes to things like predictions. It's more like an online dictionary that you can use to get more specific technical terms answered when you need to, like in a scenario where you need to build a pc, ask it about what part x is, what part y is, how to put part z, it's helpful in scenarios like that. 

So, uh, it's a public recognition card in other words? I won't deny that it's a good thing, but in the general scheme of things for a match, I don't think it has that much of an effect compared to a red/yellow card. And idk if making people feel good for doing what they're supposed to do is a necessity. Definitely, a good thing since it'd probably boost their feelings or something similar, but idk, it just paints itself in a bad way of sorts in my view.

Additionally, is this even used in players? The example uses it on a "medical staff" so I'm not sure. Cause if it is, then it'd be pretty hard to measure what "public recognition" per match would be, if it was just MVP's or an MVP play then it'd be a lot easier, but then again they'd have to reward that AFTER the game, so giving out a white card in the middle of the game doesn't seem like it'd pose that much of a use.

Eh, I reckon most online casinos would just use the excuse of issues would only arise if they were to ever win since, well, that'd be the only case where any problem found would be a problem for them. And don't most casinos word it instead like KYC on withdrawal, instead of KYC upon winning? Basically the same but I reckon they can use that as some sort of defense for these types of cases.

I do hope in general they just tell the customers to KYC at signup maybe if they were to make it a necessity in the first place. I don't think it'd make that much difference no?

I used to have fun with Casino B styles, I stopped a long time ago though, and just went with sports betting nowadays. They're fun, but they're certainly not for everyone imo. They're just too static imo, too repetitive if played enough times for long-time players, and they're rather scary (imo) for newbie players. Not to say that there aren't any players who enjoy it, otherwise casinos wouldn't have even bothered implementing it in their sites.

Nah, that's just an excuse (in terms of addiction). There are a bunch of ways you can use to ban yourself from visiting online casinos, self-exclusion exists, and extensions that ban the website (just slam the keyboard when passing a password so you don't unlock it). There are also a bunch of processes involved before you even start playing like signing up and then depositing, might be a small duration for some but definitely enough to wake up and stop yourself.

Idk if it exists but you can maybe set your card to deny withdrawal requests if it's through casinos, or just disconnect it if you see it connected. For cryptos well, idrk, maybe just throw it to a hardware wallet and lock it with multiple locks so you'd have to spend some level of effort to withdraw.

Won't deny that it does make gambling anywhere faster though.

Maybe, maybe not, but even if it did increase from here, it wouldn't boom past 30k imo, at most 25k maybe. The 20k recovery was supposed to have happened months ago which originally did iirc, but with the ftx fiasco happening, it pushed it down back and lasted till the end of the year. So it goes back up to 20k doesn't really say anything about it going up continuously once again. In the long term, I don't expect any big gains, in the short term who knows.

I actually wouldn't consider this as one in case of gambling, most casinos ask for KYC anyway and they ask for really active/recent ones, so most imposters would easily get caught. If this was the case of impersonating someone to scam someone though, then that's a different thing.

The usual bug abuse if they can find one. I consider it a type of fraud since whoever found out about it is intentionally using it for their own personal benefit. I'd probably let them go if it was once since it may have been an accident, any more than that and it's intentional imo.

Match fixing as others have pointed out as well also counts as one, even if it was sports. Whether the fixing was due to a gamble behind it or just because the teams want to advance selfishly, it'd still damage people who bet on said matches.

The moment I knew that Japan and gambling were a topic about bans, I knew horse racing would've been involved. I'm just guessing it's because it's pretty far from the general gambling games (though let's be real, ANY game can be used in any form of gambling) that most casinos are known for like poker. And from what I know, Horse Racing is really big in Japan as well.

Though I think if anyone were to find any sort of "solid" cause as to why they ain't really going to find any. The Japanese government just allows it, and that's that, it's in their jurisdiction anyway. It's not about what they "fear" as well, I guess at this point it's just they want to build up their own solid preference in terms of games used in gambling.

It's the "name" of the company that's KYC'ed imo , not the team behind it. They register under a government and I reckon said government reviews documents that they passed and basically allows the casino to exist after checking whether there's some bad rep or not in the casino. They are scared, trust me, and that's why they do KYC. Otherwise they would've just let them fuck off and not do KYC since they for sure know that their users hate KYC themselves.

Nothing. I don't think it'd have that much of a big impact on what I'd do, I'm already using it in the first place anyway, and it doesn't exactly change anything in general when it comes to paying for products/services. Heck, I reckon it wouldn't even affect most people that much, even if they were owners of Bitcoin. Might be different for countries that don't allow it though, though tbf, they can't exactly stop you if you really wanted to buy/use it.

You should be able to do that even now though. There are some countries that don't allow it but they're in the minority afaik, all in all, you should still be able to.

Nope, never. I was pretty into poker back then, even in my hs days I used to play with a group of friends and I've never even seen the combination come out even once. I used to hope it'd come out, there were some close instances at the very least, but it never really came. Heck, even a straight flush was a damn rare instance for me back then, maybe only a few times (can be counted in one hand) that it appeared, let alone a royal flush.

If it ever did appear on my games though, I wouldn't even be mad. That's just how insane it is to come out.

Me, who gave up tech analysis and just went DCA'ing Bitcoin. Am I part of the 2nd or the first one? or heck is my method even considered trading in the first place I wonder. Nonetheless, I reckon as long as a trader has "awareness" of what he's doing, I think that should be enough to say that he's a trader. Knowing that a market can go up and down, knowing what coins/assets are in, knowing what to invest and when to invest, simple stuff like that. I'd consider people who do technical analysis and chart readings and stuff like that to be more on the advanced level imo.
It's not "like" sports betting, it is one for them. Was actually this type a few years back, but hey, can't really blame anyone, knew nothing but still wanted to join in on the ride of Bitcoin back then.