I believe if the games a person plays is always simple games of "gamble/games of chance" without involving any strategy, then those games could become uninteresting especially if that person always loses.

Because what's captivating in playing a game like slots everyday of your life, for hours and hours during the day or night, without encouraging strategy?

Freespins!

Central banks added 463 tons of gold to global reserves in 2021. That was 82% higher than in 2020.

A WGC survey found that “gold’s performance during a time of crisis and its role as a long-term store of value/inflation hedge are key determinants in the decisions of central banks to hold it.”

Last year was the 12th consecutive year of net purchases. Over that time, central banks have bought a net total of 5,692 tons of gold.

"The manipulation of gold prices began on 5 August 1993," the German analyst points out, and the reason was none other than an agreement between different central banks and the then chairman of the US Federal Reserve-FED, Alan Greenspan, "who did not want the price of an ounce of gold to exceed 400 dollars" because an uncontrolled increase in the price of gold could affect the "inflation thermometer". So this agreement was in place for several years, and materialised by acting on the markets with orders to sell and lend gold with the blessing and participation of other central banks, which, he recalls, "work closely with private banks and financial institutions".

The way of operating and manipulating prices was "very simple", because these entities possessed significant amounts of gold that they used to control, if not lower, the price of gold, "expelling potential buyers" of the metal from the market who did not see the expected return on their investments. For Speck, states are the first to benefit from these practices, especially the US because its currency, the dollar, "is the world's reference currency" and gold is the main rival to loan-based currencies. "A rising gold price accentuates the debt and deficits of states", especially in the US.

Each player has his own way of seeing things, according to his experience and according to what he has lived, obviously a person who has so much experience and who has managed to win in a casino with a great advantage is something that should be respected and take into account their opinion to learn, and also to see that their opinion is the most accurate, a casino that has a normal advantage is something that many players accept, others that have a higher one already depends a lot on the player's budget, and Sometimes it can be seen that each player has his preference in casinos, if there is someone who really likes a particular casino, obviously he will go there even if the advantage is high, and if he likes slots and enjoys them, it is something that the same will take advantage of it.

I'm in! I'm urukhai in BlackJack.fun.


I believe transactions from multiple/many different public addresses would also prompt the casino to start requiring users to KYC, not just about the amount, although that too would prompt it.

I saw the whale called "winner" play in the casino today. He might be a good candidate to win free spins consistently for the Weekly Wagering Competition, IF he's "truly back".

Contrary to what you believe, or probably what you want to "believe", no I am not playing the victim card. It's simply not me.

I personally believe that each person should stand up for himself, especially against bullies, name-calling trolls, and gaslighting charlatans in the forum.

BUT criticism from a Bitcoin OG/Legendary-Whale-Investors such as you, who is a positive influence for the whole Bitcoin community, not just in this forum, is OK for me. It's probably I respect you too much. Is that wrong of me?

Relax ser, you're almost having the same reactions as franky1.

Believe me, no one is playing the "Victim Card" because there's obviously no victim.

You're the one who believes that.

Wow, this is very interesting, I think that users will be able to approve their case, but for me this is something new, I did not know that now they have to verify almost how the protocol that is used for an exchange, this is something that Not all casinos have it as a requirement, but because of the free spins, because of everything they are offering, it is worth doing it, does this mean that if I am going to enter and want to do this, is it better to verify myself first? How do they deal with players seeking privacy and anonymity? There are no special treatments for it? or definitively they have to follow the verification steps.

All of the BRRR-Money-Printing started to put it all together. It was going to happen sooner, if not later. But because of supply side disruption caused by the Russo-Ukraine War, and the opening of the economy with all that COVID-19 money injected in circulation, it was caused to come sooner.

We haven't seen the worst of basic commodity price increases, plus more problems with winter approaching. The power grids in some regions of Europe will be further tested, and it won't be OK.

But you are, it would obviously be very impossible for a HODLer who has started DCAing since 2014 to not be a Legendary-Whale-Investor. Plus it's OK to ridicule me, because you as HODLer who buys Bitcoin monthly at any price since 2014 or before that, optimism should have a new definition.

Ser, I believe your ego, and probably a biased attitude towards your fellow HODLers, is affecting your mood. I was merely making a point that even the most optimistic of HODLers will have doubts in their investment thesis, especially during the lows of the bear markets.

But, I'm a mere pleb, and the stupid one in the forum at that, and you're the "Legendary Whale-Investor". If you ridicule me, that's OK.

in fiat land. people used to only be able to buy whole shares and when 1 share was many hundreds of dollars. third world country citizens could not afford to buy single shares because their $3 a week wage (ignorant people call "coffee amount") meant they couldnt buy a single tesla share unless they saved up for years

yet bitcoin came around to solve that. allow people to buy decimal amounts every week to skip the 'save to buy' and just go straigh tto the buy stage

but then the ignorant "coffee amount" preachers then tried to say bitcoin was not fit for the 3rd world countries where bitcoin should not be used for the unbanked, in their narrow minded view. and so tried to push for 3rd world countries to adopt a sub network. offramping people away from bitcoin to this weak, insecure subnetwork

now they are saying the 3rd world countries are not "techies" and shouldnt run independent nodes but instead put their value into the trust of a custodian wallet
silly thing is that this weak subnetwork, has no big rules. thus it is not difficult to build user friendly GUI's. but as its well known when devs cant be bothered to make rules, secure a network and then make the network userfriendly.. that network is not going to succeed. but hey they dont care. they just want control and limit users abilities in the elites favour

(i mentioned this phase years ago about moving from hop model to hub/soke model of "factories"/custodians)

these ignorant people have been seen in the last couple days to start to word this subnetwork as a more risk aware less utopian promise. and even try to be more realistic by saying the unit of measure is not "bitcoin" but a different unit which they start calling LN-btc.. much like other subnetworks dont define their units as bitcoin but (binance: WBTC, liquid LBTC)

so although they have now started to sound more realistic to the risk awareness and difference of the networks and security models and utility(a positive) they are still trying to limit what 3rd world countries have access to, where only the elites can get the parts that 'make' profit at the jeopardy of the poor who have to trust the elites wont abuse such system

such a shame they wasted 5 years going down that avenue..

I'm one of the most optimisic HODLers in the forum,