If there aren't any, then it's up to you to complete the first.

You're asking quite an arbitrary question that may not have been answered before. I can't imagine that anybody else has produced a thorough review and comparison of the different blockchain solutions for land registration.

A quick Google search doesn't pull up anything that seems to match what you're looking for.

That said, if you really want help, I suggest asking this question on Quora. Some people there will put in crazy amounts of research for generic questions, so they can pretty much do your research for you.

A lot of major exchanges will ask that you partner with third-party liquidity providers. Some exchanges will also provide this service directly.

You don't always have to GIVE the liquidity provider your tokens, but you will often need to loan them a large sum, which they'll then use to keep your spreads minimized and ensure all buy/sell orders can be matched quickly.

You'll also need to ensure that you've got NDAs in place and a solid team structure with known executives. Most exchanges wont list without this, since there is too high a risk of insider trading.

You are incorrect in your line of reasoning.

Although it's true that slots have a chance of landing you a much bigger win, and have accumulators, multipliers (and often bonus games), these don't change the fact that they also have a much higher house edge and hence a lower return to player (RTP).

All in all, playing 1x roll at 100x multiplier on dice, or trying to win 100x your principal on a slot machine, you've got a better chance with the dice. There's no point discussing all the money you get in between, since these have higher win percentages, similar to wagering dice on a high win chance.

Most bounty participants are absolutely shocking bad, and yet they're still awarded stakes.

If bounty managers actually did their job correctly and only offered stakes to those that have produced meaningful results for the client project, then that would also improve the rewards for all those that deserve them. Anybody producing absolute gutteral spam shouldn't get any reward for their efforts whatsoever.

Maybe one of the main things would be to message the bounty manager right when the bounty starts, and work with them to clarify the rules to ensure this is the case. I guarantee 90% of most bounty tokens are snagged by spamming mult-accounters, rather than those that really helped to market the project—simply due to lazy or overburdened bounty managers.

If you want it fixed, it's best that this occurs right at the start of the bounty.

Honestly, I've never heard of your platform.

But just scrolling through your site I can see that your firm has put some serious time and effort into it.

It's not really clear how it works like a bank though. Does that mean your wallet provides interest on any deposits? If so, can you provide a link with more details about this?

Anybody with a sufficiently large stack of Bitcoin is likely smart enough to know not to dump their entire bag at once. Satoshi, in particular, should know this, since he invented the damn thing and gave birth to all the markets we see today.

It's estimated that Satoshi could have somewhere in the order of 10,000 to 100,000 BTC. This means he has somewhere between $90 and $900 million at today's rates. I'd call that fantastically wealthy in my opinion, even if he somehow only managed to liquidate it at 1/3 market rate, earning himself a minimum of $30 million.

Plenty of people have created similar blockchains, many of which are equally capable to Bitcoin's with far less money. So that would be a pretty great turnout for him.

First of all, I'm curious why you're writing articles on a complex topic when you don't even understand it yourself?

Are you trying to spread misinformation? I'd suggest staying away from the technical details if you don't understand them, as you will only confuse your readers.

With that said, if you're genuinely willing to learn, check out this StackExchange thread on how RingCT works;

https://monero.stackexchange.com/questions/880/eli5-how-does-ringct-work

Some of the respondents break it down nicely.

Anything that doesn't absolutely need a large stadium could resume in a closed hall.

Something like boxing, table tennis, MMA, arm wrestling, darts etc.

I don't think games like soccer, football, cricket, or anything like that can resume, simply due to the large number of people involved. Even without a live audience it's still too risky.

That said, I doubt most of these would resume anyway, since they don't have huge TV or streaming viewer numbers, they instead rely on ticket sales which obviously can't happen right now. Either way, there's no rush, everything will start coming back shortly.

Pretty sure that Ripple needs to sell their XRP in order to fund their development and marketing moves.

How else do you expect them to develop their on-demand liquidity product, grow their customer base and bring forward more use cases for the XRP token? Also, why do you think Ripple even cares about the market value of XRP right now? They're building something for the LONG TERM, which means it doesn't really matter how XRP performs now.

Sometimes you need to spend money and suffer now, so that you can be in a better position later. This is exactly what Ripple appears to be doing, I really don't think they give the slightest damn about retail investors who buy in and get rekt.

Note, I don't like Ripple in general, nor XRP—they're both terrible. I also think Ripple is a force for bad in the crypto industry. Anybody supporting it should get rekt.

If you look at the terms and conditions of most gambling sites (even crypto ones), you will find that almost all will have a clause that allows them to request identity verification from any user.

Normally they will only do this under very particular circumstances though, e.g. if they're suspected of money laundering or manipulating the system.

Obviously requesting KYC from a user is extremely bad PR, so you can understand why these platforms would be hesitant to do it.

That said, there are some benefits to the practice, and most casinos will likely implement some relaxed KYC procedures eventually due to increasing pressure from the financial authorities.

I think EOS is too complicated to ever gain mainstream usage.

Even Bitcoin/Ethereum/Litecoin etc are considered to be relatively complicated for the layman, how do you think these people will feel when they have to work out how much CPU, NET, and RAM they need to complete a transaction or interact with a smart contract?

There has been a mass exodus of projects away from EOS for this exact reason. Sure, it's fast, but its complexity outweighs its benefits.

I also don't like the idea of 21 block producers, not enough decentralized IMO, even if they are voted in by the community. I'm sure several of them rigged their way into position.

Of course there are underground casinos, though not sure that's the term I'd use.

You can just search on Craigslist, Reddit, Meetup.com etc, there's still a huge number of posts for home games for card games.

Probably not as many as there were before the lockdown, but there are still a substantial number of new posts.

The governments obviously wouldn't allow home casinos, because you need a gambling license to offer these services to ensure you provide fair games. Plus, they wouldn't get any tax revenue from these places, and they could easily be used for laundering money.

It's only possible to be a professional gambler if you are playing a game that has a skill element, e.g. blackjack, baccarat, poker and sports betting.

There might be a few others, but I'm not aware of them.

I've been a professional poker player for around a decade now, mostly playing at brick and mortar casinos, and believe me there is a huge difference between the average fish and a pro.

A pro can literally bankrupt a fish pretty easily while playing on the low stakes tables, whereas it's not possible to take advanced of such a skill disparity with most gambling games, e.g. lottery, crash or hi-lo. So don't even bother trying to be a "pro" at these games, because you'll fail.

They absolutely must be hiring liquidity manufacturers or deploying trading bots.

The trading volume some of these IEOs see soon after listing is insane—even given the hype they receive during the IEO and prior to listing.

Then this suddenly drops off a few weeks after listing, indicating the contract with the liquidity provider has finished.

If you're going to invest in IEO tokens, the only right time to do so is DURING the IEO. Anything after is rolling a loaded dice.

The fight has been postponed, so why is this thread still open?

Also, the poll is completely unnecessary, it's quite clear that Fury has won by an absolute landslide, more votes will achieve nothing.

I suggest locking this thread until the fight is rescheduled.

Bitcoin is actually trading at $9,500—not $9,700.

In any case, we can't say that this growth can be attributed to the halving, since Bitcoin has already been on a dramatic uptrend since at least mid-March (after getting half of its value slashed as a result of the COVID19 pandemic).

Correlation doesn't equal causation, any logical trader will realize that the halving is simply incidental at this point, it will take some time until the reduced mintage has a knock-on effect on the price action of Bitcoin. (If ever).

I guess she doesn't understand that even animal welfare means freedom from disease.

I'm sure people would rather lose some income rather than be in hospital having their lungs ventilated because they're got bacterial or viral pneumonia!

I understand there's a need to balance the effects on the economy with the effects on people's health, however, it should not be forced on everyone.

Maybe they should have a vote on it. Let the citizens on Las Vegas vote whether they want to take the health or financial hit. At least it's fair that way.

Not sure how somebody showing interest and placing a big spotlight on Bitcoin indicates it's time to short.

Wouldn't that mean that the market is more likely to pump? Unless of course the majority of the surrounding discussions were negative?

Seems like Elon Musk, CZ and a bunch of others chimed in too, and yet Bitcoin did in fact dip temporarily.

I doubt it had anything to do with JK though, probably more likely the fact that the Bitcoin.org domain is about to change hands—potentially indicating a hostile takeover is imminent.

Although it's definitely an old user, I don't get why it necessary needs to be Satoshi or any other major early participant?

No doubt there were hundreds of people involved in Bitcoin before the first 10,000 blocks were mined. It isn't unreasonable to assume that some of these finally rediscovered their old stash and looked to cash out.

After all, that is $500k worth of Bitcoin. Few people have the personal net worth necessary to continue waiting and watching after discovering such a sum.

In any case, I'm sure the blockchain analytics platforms and even some unpaid detectives here on Bitcointalk will be all over it, looking for any link they can to potentially put a name to the transaction.