I'm hopeful that it is, we haven't seen any big dumps after getting past $20k and even though it's slow, we're seeing a gradual increase in the price. I might wait till at least it goes past $30, $35k though before actually putting past it crashing back down the gutter. We might end the year at around $40k. After that, it's just a waiting game again to see if it drops back down or continues its gradual increase. Not expecting any big pumps though.

Tried looking for it with a quick lookup but I couldn't find it. This is highly unlikely imo for real estate since they don't necessarily accept crypto as payment in general, they only accept fiat and even if they actually did accept crypto, you'd understand that they have at least some form of understanding about the crypto scene. Now if these "fake tokens" were actually valued at the start of the purchase but dropped at some point which lead to the value dropping to zero, I think the real estate agent would be at fault (since they should know about the volatility of crypto at the point when they actually accepted it as payments). It'd be a different thing if it really was a fake token though and for some reason, the agent still accepted the purchase.

About $2.3k I guess? Maybe even higher if hype about it goes well beyond what it is right now which might push the price temporarily to above $3k. If it proves to be rather disappointing though after the merge, then it might just plummet back to around $1.5k, maybe lower if again, the hype brings it back up, then it can also slam it back down if the response to it was very disappointing. I'd honestly expect at the minimum for it to breach past $2k and maybe go around $2.3 as I said earlier. Wait and see for the rest imo.

Mostly entertained. Sure I do feel sad when I lose money and I feel happy when I win, but I pretty much leave those feelings behind whenever I stop gambling. Win or lose, it's just a matter of me trying to enjoy the process. I do sometimes extend my sessions depending on what I generally feel though, like if I'm feeling pretty excited after I was supposed to end, I'd probably add a few more minutes into my game till I lose that excitement. I generally don't want to put my excitement out there while I finish gambling already since expectations may build up, so I just release it there and then.

Pretty sure it's a no-brainer for holidays to be a time to gamble if you are one. They have a bunch of events that basically scream "gamble now" after all, and most people are attracted to it since, well, it is a bonus compared to your usual sessions.
I don't get how time correlates with you being able to "win more". Does that mean that the more players are playing concurrently, the higher your chances of winning are? Man if numbers were everything in a casino then it wouldn't even be a business anymore imo.
I thought it was because it's payday

#1 shouldn't be an issue I think since the core features of Bitcoin (decentralized, capped supply, etc.) are something that is a part of Bitcoin itself, if it were to be proposed to change those, the result would not necessarily be "Bitcoin" anymore imo, like what happened to BitcoinCash.

#2 isn't also an issue since changes aren't exactly published as soon as they're made. You yourself seem to know the progress of programming, you should also know more than anyone else that changes are always reviewed a lot of times before being pushed into publication. If there's a process that's involved, you can say that proposing is at the top and publishing it is at the very end.

Wouldn't that lead to a vast increase in price in the long run? Especially if it was discovered by people, that a group was buying out the entire circulating supply, not to mention that not all Bitcoin owners are actually actively selling them. With that, the government can't buy everything out in one buy out, so they have to bide their time which could exponentially increase the price. And they won't even get anything back, they would have just wasted that entire funding to buy out which may not even be the complete supply of Bitcoin to kill it out.

I'm surprised the presence of hormones affecting our mindset such as dopamine isn't included (or might've just been generalized into the mental health problems). But anyhow, most cases actually involved actively expecting something from their sessions, which shouldn't happen. The most that we could expect is that sense of fulfillment for being able to gamble, but nothing more than that. It's like how games give us a sense of satisfaction after playing them (or any other form of entertainment really).

 Cause realistically speaking, I don't think sessions where multiple gamblers would attend would work out. They should be given individual attention instead so that the root of the problem can be properly removed or alleviated to let them gamble without having them have problems.

Forbes has a category for vices, though it's general and not specifically for gambling you can still find gambling news there. Other than that I've only ever visited gamblingnews which the first reply already said.  If it was sports news then again, Forbes has it as well but it's probably the same as any other website specialized in sports news. I've also watched ESPN before, not that actively recently any more though but it'd still probably be a good source of news.

It isn't odd. I myself have some biases when it comes to certain sports, and I've done some pretty dumb shit by betting on them on a losing match but hey, it isn't that weird for me to hope for something to happen. I also especially like betting on dark horses when it comes to matches so betting on my bias even though they're lower compared to their enemy is pretty normal for me. I just stop betting in general on a match all together when there's like an insane difference between the two teams, to the point you'd ask why is this team here kind of thing.

I guess it'd also depend on the costs for the implementation of such designs? I'd honestly keep it simple for games with minimal interaction like slots (though if they were to create one like the one OP made then things may change), but if it was rather expensive with constant maintenance, it may not be worth it in the long term. There are probably a bunch of ways they can include the character for the animation of slots if they take their time to think about it which might seem rather interesting though it may make the slots lose its allure of being simple and fast (since a lot of process would be added with the character bieng involved). 

I don't think they have that much of a difference between the rewards system. At best it'd be rather minimal that you'd probably bet a LOT before you even notice it taking effect. The number of events that casinos host may differ though and imo that would be the thing to checkout instead of the rewards system. Casinos may also have their own specializations such that they reward more players for playing a specific game or two, e.g. their own developed game instead of games from service providers or something similar.

On a side note, casinos that give out 99% RTP probably only give it out on a few specific games (or maybe just one). Them saying they have 99% isn't technically wrong that way.

Hey, Myth 11 does happen. It isn't a myth imo BUT I don't actually use it on gambling. I mostly feel like playing rhythm games since even if it requires skill, sometimes a little bit of luck can push you a bit further ahead. Might've done it sometimes with gambling but I still play mostly because, well, I just want to.

How Martingale players think (It does work with a big enough bankroll though). I mean if you were playing to get your money back, might as well NOT play at all no? It's shooting yourself at the foot. And if you play fps games, you know this isn't true

This shouldn't be applicable to games like poker no? Maybe even blackjack (and some other table/card games). Sports gambling as well if it can be included.

You'd probably have to start up with an office job or something similar at the start if you wanted to start up a business. You can look for investors but it'd probably be rather difficult again without anything to show for it. I'd go for starting your own business if you can. The difficulties you'd have with the latter are vastly different from the former though since you're also taking into account workers you'd hire and the future actions you're business is going to take.

Honestly, if you're not fit for the two, I'd try looking for freelancing opportunities if what you like doing aligns with it.

Wrong board, but anw if you don't want to risk anything by trying to min-max your profits to the absolute, just DCA imo. Especially when the market is down, if you haven't started DCA'ing then those spots are usually the best to start with since the risk would be a lot lower compared to starting DCA when the market was at its peak.

I honestly think we're just recovering from that huge dip but we probably aren't going anytime sooner to above $30k. Wouldn't surprise me if we went back to $20k by the end of the year, but imo we'd probably continue seeing this steady, maybe slow climb.

It might've been considered luck only if there were no other players or if rounds can last up to only so long but no, games could last to pretty lengthy times afaik, especially on a professional level. It's also brutal tbf, since even if we do consider that it isn't luck only, the fact stays that there will always be a factor of luck involved so you'd sometimes get hit on the ass without knowing. Other sports may be a grind but imo, but poker is also a grind. After all, it isn't a lottery game, it's a game where you play against other players and slowly take what's theirs for yours.

I guess Policies aren't included in OP's definition of "anywhere" Honestly would be odd for players not to expect KYC when withdrawing in most casinos, it's almost become a regular thing imo, especially for those big ones out there.

I guess the fact that digital payments are available for most stuff and they're pretty instant is the reason why hard, cold cash is preferred when it comes to budgeting compared to digital. It's convenient, and yet unusual hence why impulsive actions take place. Plus, I guess it's been engrained or something similar to us about using cash physically instead? A transition to digital is bound to happen imo but it would definitely occur on another generation being used to it instead of most of us where using cash is still pretty dominant.

I'm definitely in it for the digital though. A lot more convenient in most cases.

Let's be real, it isn't just double or triple. Most people want that life-changing win that can 100% turn around what you are right now. Wins of double or triple are really just appetizers that whet your appetite to create a greater anticipation towards that certain big win.

Just gamble what you can afford to lose. It's a rather simple rule yet people still tend to forget or ignore it. You wouldn't need to think of consequences when spending that certain amount so it's a full on enjoyment.

Well, it's a nice addition, especially in the case of Japan where a lot are fans of their anime. If, say, they were to make something similar to this with player vs AI kind of games and the AI basically acts something like this, then damn that might be an entertaining experience in itself. I definitely would try this out myself since I'm quite fond of Japanese animation, unsure about others though since afaik there are still people who frown upon it.

On the winning chance, pretty sure all of us know that this wouldn't increase or improve it but hey, if this makes slots entertaining (for me at least), then I'll definitely try it out.