|
Both South American teams have a decent chance of qualifying to the semis today. Croatia haven't shown much quality in the tournament so far. They are awful going forward and haven't created much except in the Canada game. Brazil on the other hand shone in the attack and fullbacks (to my surprise) have played amazingly. Brazil taking this one with a difference of 2-3 goals.
On the contrary, Netherlands vs Argentina is much more poised. Before the tournament started, the Netherlands looked an average team but they have shown the quality and dominated every game they played. But Argentina won't be an easy team to beat. Argentina improved by at least 20-30% in every game since Saudi defeat. All the four teams which played against Argentina so far sat back and didn't let Argentina create much. Argentina attack shines when the opponent tries to score and leaves the spaces open. So it will be interesting to see if the Netherlands will continue their strategy from the US game and don't let Argentina progress easily with a low block and less possession or they will start attacking from the first minute. The result will be largely dependent on this.
|
|
|
|
Does someone know how to reach our World Cup prediction pool from Superbru when logged in?
Like a list of all competitions (past and active) where I'm joined.
I haven't figured out yet how to reach our pool World Cup prediction pool when logged in and entering the link from hilariousandco's PM all the time is a bit annoying.
I click on any match link shown under 'Upcoming' or 'Live & Result' section on the dashboard:  It takes me to the page where I can find all the pools associated with that tournament that I have joined:  |
|
|
|
|
smh, how many World Cup pools are there? I already joined 2 and think I am missing some still.
|
|
|
|
|
SportsBet username: webtricks
|
|
|
|
|
I just noticed the thread. Sounds fun and I would love to join. Looks like it's already filled. Place me on the reserve and let's see if I have any luck.
|
|
|
|
a picture below is just custome e-money card from my local bank, no bitcoin inside just fiat for toll road payment.
~image~
So,
is possible create e-bitcoin for toll road payment?,
because I've confusing to create a payment where we have to sign a transaction with a private key, where that card toll is just Tap on EDC without signing the private key button. and as I know, all data (maybe private key) on inside on chip card,
If possible, how is work?, and how to keep it save, no leaks data inside chips?
~ link~
The cards don't contain the funds. They contain the user's information either encrypted (using PIN) or otherwise. When the user taps it on POS, the user's information along with the payment information are sent to the bank and the amount is deducted from the user's bank account if the information is authentic. Now your question is that what if we directly load BTC on a card and create a BTC transaction right at the Point of Sale (PoS) by signing a transaction using the card just by the tap of the card. Well, it's remotely possible if we place an encrypted private key of a loaded address on a card and the user types the password on the machine with the pre-generated transaction to attest the signature. But it's an awful idea. The better approach would be to create a digital wallet where the users can deposit the funds using BTC and link the details of this wallet with a card, just like how the banks do with fiat. |
|
|
|
~
yeah, i understood it was money laundering case. but instead of mentioning that it was just a user's account that got seized. they had to sensationalize it using only the company's name. Yeah, moreover, Binance co-operated with ED on this matter. They froze and seized the user's funds in the favor of ED after receiving the request from ED. But media is projecting it if Binance has made the default. Classic Indian media. On the different note, this case could be seen as a warning by the Indian traders. They consider Binance as a safe haven and think that if they move funds from Indian exchanges to Binance, the authorities can't trace it anymore. However, this isn't the case. As long as their identities are linked, the authorities have the rights under PMLA Act, 2002 to seek for such help from the foreign companies. |
|
|
|
|
Game 1: 51' 2-1 São Paulo FC
Game 2: 51' 2-2 Draw
Game 3: 51' 3-0 Newcastle
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to the PM,
You made some serious allegation against the site. Changing the hashed server seed post-reveal is one of the nastiest things I can imagine a house doing. However, I tested the site with over 50 bets and I didn't see any irregularity in the site. They reveal the upcoming server seed's hash before we set the client seed (which is a good thing). I tested the results using my custom script and everything is in order. The server seed hash didn't change for me post-reveal.
Can you tell me how often did you see the difference between the hashed server seed pre-reveal and post-reveal? Is it for every bet or just for the one in the screenshot? I am sorry but the single screenshot is very less of an evidence to judge the legitimacy of a site. A user can easily edit the image with 'Inspect Element' and put a different seed to defame the site. I don't consider the evidence to be conclusive enough especially when my inquiry didn't reveal any irregularity in the fairness script.
|
|
|
|
|
Game 1: 69' 3-0 Aston Villa
Game 2: 69' 2-0 Arsenal
Game 3: 69' 2-1 São Paulo FC
|
|
|
|
You are still liable to pay the tax even if you sell it to someone outside India. TDS doesn't increase the tax liability of the seller. It is just a mechanism to track the trade of the cryptocurrencies. But since, imposing TDS requirements on the foreign buyers is difficult so the government left them outside the purview of this section.
It would be smart decision to declare it as a payment made against export of service and just pay the usual income tax on it. Since there's no service tax/GST on inward remittances for exported services. You would still have to file GST(if you have a GST number) at 0% This isn't that simple. You will need Foreign Inward Remittance Certificate (FIRC) from your Authorized Dealer as the proof that the money you are receiving is against a genuine export of goods or services. Without a valid FIRC, GST authority may reject your stand and you will have to pay 18% out of your own pocket. By the way, why do you want to show it as an export? There is no GST on trading. Only TDS and Income Tax provisions applicable on trading. Unless you are earning crypto by selling goods or services, there is no applicability of GST.s |
|
|
|
Q1. What if I buy/sell coins from/to foreign person?
A1. TDS provisions are only applicable if the seller is a resident of India. If you buy coins from a foreign person (including foreign exchanges), you aren’t required to deduct TDS. Conversely, if you are a seller, the foreign person is required to deposit TDS but since it is not practically possible, NO TDS applicable when you buy or sell coins from or to a foreign person.
So If I sell my cryptos to someone in US, and ask them to wire me the money. Then I will be paying Zero TDS + Zero GST Damn, I guess I will find a buyer in US since the government seems to have no problem with it  TDS on coin conversion is pretty stupid, and it will kill all Indian exchanges. I would rather exchange it at foreign exchange instead of paying 1% on every conversion to some Indian cex. In a way, they didn't directly ban cryptos in India but they killed it with a knife to the back. You are still liable to pay the tax even if you sell it to someone outside India. TDS doesn't increase the tax liability of the seller. It is just a mechanism to track the trade of the cryptocurrencies. But since, imposing TDS requirements on the foreign buyers is difficult so the government left them outside the purview of this section. However, I agree with your second point. Locking 1% from every trade as a TDS will lead to liquidity crunch and virtually kill the market. We are already seeing horrendous drop in the volume on Indian exchanges and the situation is going to get worse unless we have a better regulations. |
|
|
|
Hello,
Thank you so much for all replies.
How about the transaction fee? Any wallet with the zero transaction fee?
Note: Wallet (non-custodial) doesn't charge the transaction fee, you are paying the network fee. There are plenty of wallets which will let you sign and broadcast transactions with zero transaction fee, with or without below relay fee! error. @PowerGlove has beautifully explained above what relay fee means. But when you are making wallet, the main stress should be on usability. A good fee suggestion algorithm and low/high fee warnings according to it are the desirable features from the wallet. If that system is in place then the wallet can let the users select any fee (even zero if they want). |
|
|
|
Bitcoin developers have no control over anything whatsoever, least of which the network and people's transactions or keys! In fact bitcoin was created so that we no longer need any third parties and centralized authorities to control our money, in other words to get rid of the system you just explained here.
This is why bitcoin is completely decentralised in every manner unlike those centralised shitcoins in which you are not provided with the freedom and the main authority lies with the owner. Bitcoin is free from these central chain of authority and all the developers and miners are working voluntarily and don't have the control over network which means they can't make any changes to the network and the whole process carried out in a decentralised manner from one end to other not involving third party and we don't need any changes in the system. None of the existing blockchain provides the level of access as mentioned in OP to the devs at the protocol level. Yes, some chains are relatively easier to target for 51% attack but it doesn't mean they provide intentional mechanism for devs to transfer user's funds without authentication. In fact, if we go more technical, almost every blockchain uses the same way of encrypting users' funds like Bitcoin does (ignoring State vs UTXO difference) through SLIP-44 which is based on BIP-44. You will find over 1000 blockchains having the derivation paths based on SLIP-44 in the link I mentioned. There are some crap custodial-based tokens which are being built on the top of other blockchains and could be locked by the issuer and all but let's not confused those tokens with the blockchain protocol. They are just an implementation over the blockchain via smart contracts and smart contracts can have custom rules but it doesn't mean the whole chain is equally vulnerable.
After reading the OP, I am thinking that the simplification of Bitcoin's working into address and balance is doing more harm than good. People are completely misunderstanding the way Bitcoin works. Maybe, it's a high time that we should drop the use of the terms like 'sending funds to the address' and start using something like 'locking value in the script'. |
|
|
|
So, expanding the question a bit. Do you think the 'larger well known' exchanges that don't go for the more stringent checks are lazy, or are they lying about something or something else?
I know I said above I don't get a vote, but I would put it under lying about financial stability. I think a lot of these places like to brag how much they do / how large they are and it's not 100% true.
The question is highly subjective depending upon the location of the user. I am from India and as of now, there is no specific law for the crypto exchanges here. They are working in the status of ambiguity, fulfilling the general rules laid down by the central bank for the companies involved in financial services. So, for me the reputation and user-trustworthiness play more importance than number of license or pan-US approval in determining the genuinity of the exchange. I am fine using the international exchanges working from the small-island countries or not providing services in certain locations to avoid stringent regulations as long as I know that they are not explicitly illegal in my country and users put great trust in those. |
|
|
|
you do know they were independent for thousands of years before the brits invaded
it should be "happy prison release anniversary"
(im british white, but even i see the irony in calling it an independence day)
if you were free for as long as you can remember, and then locked up by someone that came in and put shackles on you.. put rules on you.. and then one day you were no longer under it. thats more like prison release not independence
india never actually NEEDED Britain. they were not dependant on britain. thus it was not an event of becoming independent (from a point of dependant)
It is a day of celebration for Indians. We want to remember it as something positive, hence `independence`. Do you think generations to come will get solace in the event if we call it something like `prison release`? lol. I never seen someone questioning same for US's 4th of July celebrations. |
|
|
|
|
"I played for Man City for 4 years & never even knew there was another club in Manchester." : Players in 2030.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
