If the future looks so good (and bright), why is the sign yellow then?

Yellow is a warning color (with red reserved for immediate danger), so, if anything, it must be more like green. Regardless, if Bitcoin is to break its ATHs, it won't be a slow climb. If history teaches us anything, we went from measly 2k (seems more like outright pathetic now) to mind-boggling 20k in under half a year

Then we went vertical from a little over 3k to almost 14k (in less than 3 months). From this perspective, it is not a question of whether we will reach a new ATH (we will) or even how soon (sooner or later), but rather if we won't crash back after that. This is the question that we should concern ourselves with

Neither do I

Computer games (just like the Internet) have been around for pretty long (definitely longer than 20 years) to make any significant difference between the millenial generation and the one preceding it. So if we are to make millenials into a failed generation (for whatever purpose or reason), we should start with the older generation. To sum it up, it is just a typical rant about youth being a failure going on since the beginning of times

Well, it's been ten days since my recent report here. And here're the fresh stats:



As everyone can confirm, I've been able to make almost 40% on my betting capital within the last 10 day period. Other than free doges (around 40 a week aka 7-Day Streak) and winnings reinvested, nothing has been added to my balance. In simple words, it is all pure profit generated exclusively through gambling (more specifically, by using martingale wisely and safely). You may like it or you may not like it (which I understand, just in case), but the stats are not lying, no matter the odds

Maybe, because it pays back, eventually?

If we postulate that the government can't exist without taxes (which seems to be a widely accepted point here), it should be interested in the steady and consistent flow of this money, right? But if the government doesn't support public schools and the healthcare system, it will be shooting itself in the foot over the long run. Indeed, the law of diminishing returns is fully applicable here (as elsewhere), so you wouldn't actually expect these areas to be of top-notch quality, but it is not like the government should disengage altogether, either

Кому интересно, тест C1 Business English (там сложнее не было):



Можно смело валить в Европу

Does that mean that Stunna is going to become the chief demon "out there"?

Or will he be just a pet boy to some really big gun whose name we don't even know (but it is still well-known to "policy makers" indeed)? However, let me play devil's advocate here (pun intended). As the saying goes (actually, it is from Luke 15:7, so no plagiarism conceived), there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance. Therefore, casino operators should repent immediately and give all their profit back to gamblers (well, at least some part of it to some of the gamblers). In this manner, they can save their souls and thus turn into saints (kind of)


What about redemption, really?

Inflation is synonymous with fiat losing value and purchasing power (read, its worth)

Unless by inflation you mean something other than price inflation, of course. But even if you in fact mean inflation of money supply (i.e. increase in the amount of money in circulation), in most cases it is still followed by price inflation. Either way, any fiat currency is losing its worth over time. It is kind of set in stone, though the degree of its intensity varies widely among countries, from small inflation (e.g. US or EU) to hyperinflation (e.g. Venezuela)

You know what?

This type of question has been asked throughout many millennia of human history (obviously, to highlight the friction between the younger and the older generation). A quotation seems appropriate:


Now guess how long ago it was written. For crying out loud, THREE THOUSAND YEARS AGO!

Эти проблемы ожидаемы

За Либрой стоит конкретная корпорация, и какая бы влиятельная она не была, в случае необходимости ей быстро заткнут рот. У кого есть сомнения на этот счет, рекомендую ознакомиться с историей Standard Oil (не путать с Газпромом). Не думаю, что Марк захочет наступить себе на яйки. Ему и так норм - и без Либры

Это с битком и прочей криптобратией финансовому истеблишменту приходится мириться, а на Либру управа есть, она объективна и эффективна. Поэтому максимум на что она будет способна (в случае ее появления, разумеется) - это роль своего рода игровой валюты без выхода за пределы Фейсбука

There can be many explanations

They might have been running some promotion elsewhere that succeeded magnificently. Or it can be Bitcoin going down (along with the whole cryptomarket) and people losing their hopes while finding recourse and some consolation in gambling (as it happened with one dude here). Whatever the reason, it is the dynamic that counts, i.e. whether this number holds or goes down to regular 40-50 users in a couple days

If you mean paper as in real paper, then it is one thing

But if you actually mean just physical representation, i.e. not necessarily in paper, it is a completely different story. As I mentioned above, there are physical devices (technically USB sticks) which can be used to transfer the ownership of private keys without anything being recorded on the blockchain, ever

If you ask me, for all practical intents and purposes, this is what physical bitcoins would be. And while their area of application may in fact be limited, they still have some use. Say, if you want to receive bitcoins from or give them to your counterparty in a truly anonymous way, this appears to be only the reliable way to go (and no, mixers don't cut it)

It doesn't really matter

Well, in the 19th century (before the Civil War) US banks had been issuing gold receipts (or how they were called), and this wasn't a problem as long as they didn't abuse their power, i.e. didn't issue more receipts than they had physical gold in their vaults (gold standard on a private level)

Obviously, they very soon started to exploit the popularity of these notes (I guess the origin of the term banknote refers to that period) by printing receipts not backed up by anything which led to bank runs and bankruptcies (probably another term originating in those times), but that's a different story


I don't really know. But who could say some 20+ years ago that Bitcoin itself was possible (I refer to its decentralized nature mostly)? The thing is, if you can check the authenticity of a paper bitcoin, i.e. to check that it hasn't been spent by someone else, it's okay. In fact, there are OpenDime devices which serve as physical bitcoins, so we can actually say that there is a way to check that in a "provably fair" manner


We don't need to, but technically, there will certainly be certain discrepancies - either premiums or discounts - depending on the ease of use and such things

You won't believe me guys

But when I read the thread title, I actually misread it as "What will be the Fate of Casino business owners?", thinking about what is going to happen to them all in the afterlife (provided there is some form of afterlife, of course). So, to rephrase the question asked (while still being on topic), are casino operators going to Hell or Heaven when their days are over here, on Earth? Are they cursed or are they in fact blessed? What is the stance of different religious doctrines on this matter (not to start holy wars)?

Ради интереса протестировался на знание родного языка на text.ru (кому интересно):



Такие дела

Was it Mark Twain who said that there are three kinds of lies?

Namely, lies, damned lies, and statistics. And since the intensity seems to be rising from left to right, we must assume that statistics are the most insidious and treacherous form of lies, even more damned than the most damned of all lies. More specifically, we don't know how unique these visitors are at all

As with online gamblers, there should be gambling addicts as well who spend their whole days, or rather nights (or maybe even days and nights), at the tables. In this way, we should be very cautious to draw any definitive conclusions from these figures as to who actually visits these establishments and how often


In fact, I heard that narrative many years ago, that the majority of money comes from simple folks. But that must be an urban legend, myth, or something to that effect


New money versus old money

This is a feature of randomness, so to speak

The patterns of outcomes you refer to are just as random as any given outcome (provided the latter is truly random, of course). As I understood it, you want to say that a truly random distribution is not the same as a uniform distribution and in that I totally agree with you, it is not

To put it differently, if we didn't know in advance that the outcomes are random, we could be fooled into thinking they are not by looking at these patterns. But since we assume that the outcomes are in fact random, there is no way or possibility that the patterns can be repetitive since otherwise it would violate that assumption


Is there any evidence to that effect?

You seem to be missing a very important detail in the whole picture

Given enough rolls, the ratio of winning bets to losing ones on 1.01x will be like 99 to 1. You just should stay away from increasing your bet amount after the loss and let this ratio play out itself eventually. Thus having a winning streak of 100 rolls is what you will get on average with so small a multiplier (maybe, a little less than that due to the house edge). You simply can't have it any other way since otherwise you are not betting on 1.01x


Isn't it what you should in fact expect as the autobet settings are taken from the manual mode settings?

But does it prove that the bet results are not valid and legit?

Besides, I don't really think that the bet outcomes are skewed for beginners. That simply doesn't make sense, and for two good reasons. First, if it becomes publicly known it would hurt terribly the reputation of the casino and reputation is everything in this day and age (especially in so delicate and competitive area as online gambling)

And second, if the odds were in fact skewed in favor of new comers (read, the house edge went into negative for them), anyone could easily exploit that to their own advantage by registering new account every time they were going to bet. As you can see, it is simply not worth it as potential losses may widely exceed any benefits


What about decentralized casinos where the bet outcome is determined by the network (e.g. by EOS mainnet and its transactions)

Actually, I expected something like that

If someone loses a ton of money, he could potentially sue Google for letting him download such an app. It is unlikely that he will get anywhere in the court (though who knows), but it is certainly going to damage the image and public perception that Google wants to present and translate into the world. In simple words, it is easier and probably safer for them to distance themselves from online gambling platforms and not to get entangled in possible controversies

I agree with the post you replied to (that was a reply to my post)

We shouldn't and wouldn't use martingale in this setup. As I explained above, you pretty fast get to the house edge on 1.01x, which means that it won't take a lot of bets till you recover what you lost (minus the house edge obviously). In other words, if you make 100 bets, you will see that the number of losing bets comes pretty close to what you would expect from a 1.01 multiplier. You can be damn sure that on a long enough timeline (in fact, quite short for martingale), you will be losing only the house edge