Warren Buffet has always been against Crypto and I don't think that's going to change any time sooner. He's seen the market go up and down and as an investor, I'm pretty sure that would normally be enough to say that they made a mistake, but he didn't say so and instead solidified his position of going against Bitcoin. There's not even any point in trying to get him to accept Bitcoin, he has his own investing strategy, and investing in innovative projects might just simply be not one of them.

Bear market ig. I mean it goes back up in the past month wasn't really a sign of it entering a bullish season, it was just a recovery from the bearish run before it. I guess it couldn't hold that recovery and went back down once more, might be because of the general outlook right now on the market being negative. I wouldn't consider it that bad though, I mean we were in this same state a month ago, If we zoom out then it's just an up down movement so far. Maybe if we go down to $20k levels, then panic a bit.

I'm just going to judge this based on the cost of goods and services and compared to back then when I was a kid, it has increased but not to the point where it has heavily damaged OUR living standards. I can't say the same for other families though. Based on what I remember a decade or so ago, the increase in price could be scaled to around 30%? It might be higher on other services or products, but most of what is needed (at least for me) for everyday life increased by that much iirc. This is in PH btw.

I can't say that it's THAT good though since the minimum wage is still fairly low to properly support your family.

I'm rather amazed at how people find connections for the weirdest of things. He's an entrepreneur, he wouldn't have reached his current position if he couldn't use his brain to think about stuff,  and buying Twitter based on this kid certainly isn't one of them. I wouldn't even consider Musk having "impulsive" actions, pretty sure they all have some thinking behind them one way or another. Plus I don't think he gives a damn about what people think about him, so I don't think being "afraid" of jack is plausible.

Thing is, that's your opinion, and you certainly ain't the owner of the various casinos out there. Businesses don't look at things in the short term, having a lack of players in the early stage certainly isn't a problem for them since the plans they've made take such situations into account. Given enough time, most casinos would grow to a level enough to actually pay back the losses (and probably more) that they lost early on when the player count was low.

They would all require you, in the end, to submit KYC details afaik. They cover it up by saying that they'd only do KYC "if needed", but in most cases, if not all ,withdrawals (for big wins) would usually be those "if needed" scenarios. In the end, I'd highly suggest that you'd be prepared to submit KYC details whenever you register, whether or not it's immediately needed on registration.

That's for scam casinos imo. Legitimate ones might just really need to take some time before processing the documents you submitted. Maybe wait for a week before submitting a query about the current status, then if it lasts a month, you can probably safely say that the site is a scam.

Anything you'd want to boost popularity with would always use social media as a medium. It's basically a hub where people can easily interact and share their opinions, as well as spread them to basically everyone else that uses the internet. The major goal in using it anyway is to let the people know of the existence of the project you are endorsing, the rest of the information added is just flavor to increase the chances of you actually remembering it (or not). As long as the project sticks out to someone, I'm pretty sure most businesses would consider it a success.

Well the most basic method to judge someone is the amount of profit (in %) they can earn in general. Ofc it probably isn't all, but if you were looking for the simplest metric, then that would be it imo.

Yea just don't. DYOR, stop trying to think that others would simply give you their research and study of the market. Think about it, that's a profiting strategy, would you willingly share it? Maybe a small number would, but a majority would never.
Probably scam? I mean there might be legit ones, but they would be rather hard to find. I'd say just don't look for escrow in telegram.

But it's tedious, and honestly not worth the effort if you want to look at it as your main source of income. In all honesty, you'd probably be better off looking to learn something instead of trying this kind of activity. There might even be better ways to earn money through beer money activities. And you could probably learn some stuff there even in rare cases.

I don't think casinos would do that, they'd much rather ask for an official partnership with famous YouTubers, artists, or simply content creators instead of some random guy on the internet that wants to earn money. It's not really rude, it's just business.

I suppose? (Though I'm also a PH resident so I suppose they've already done it). Might be better to ask this as a personal opinion instead of a what-if for the government. Anyway, I'd suppose I'd do the same. Yes I understand the logic that it isn't really the activity's fault for them doing those stuff, Pretty sure any gambling activity would make them do the same, but you can't deny that it IS still the apparent reason at that moment. Though this is a band-aid solution really at most since it doesn't really attack the core of the problem

No, not really. I mean I get the logic, and it's exactly why I refuse to blame the activity. Just that it's a kind of delicate matter imo, since we're tackling here the mentality of players. And it's a LOT harder to educate people compared to outright just banning the source of the problem (even if there are multiple sources forr the problem).

Probably because as you said, if they were to give out a way to check the RTP, if it were to ever change the cause of some variance and shows unmatched results, it may just be argued that the casino is lying. Not to mention that for the average user, it's rather complicated that they wouldn't even bother trying it out in the first place. And considering how casinos are in the first place, businesses and they would, ofc, prioritize profits first, putting out that small feature (even if it's rather simple), they wouldn't really bother with it.

No one's hating on you trust me, it's just that we gotta let reality slap you in the face since you're kind of in the clouds with how you're thinking right now. Bonuses given when creating accounts or doing something are natural when it comes to most of this stuff, but they're really small and for withdrawals, you need to pretty much provide your identity. Up to you if you think giving out your identity is worth that few bucks. I'd suggest trying to earn money that you'd be capable of losing, then invest slowly into assets you think would grow in the long term (which is safer).

I mean THAT is the core of trading, it's basically the part that determines whether you're going to profit or not, ofc it's difficult. To help in identifying it, the two types of analysis (fundamental and technical) should be pretty helpful for you to decide on a path to take. Ofc it still involves you understanding the market and making your own predictions and suggestions based on your own current understanding, but all those are based on what news you actually receive or analyze anyway. You also can't deny that "gut feelings" have helped a lot of traders in the past, but that'd be a one or two off kind of thing imo.

^This. Horse racing is an industry that's been in place for SO long. Do you think its morality and ethics haven't been questioned in that period of time? It's probably been asked a lot really, and the government has probably done a LOT to actually address it imo. Ofc the core of this should always be to take care of horses as much as sports teams take care of their players. It's really just a matter of trying to improve the quality that horses are able to experience so that they can race to their fullest (naturally, that is).

As you said, that would raise questions about it being rigged. Horse racing is a battle of numbers after all, and I think virtual horse racing would simplify trying to identify those numbers (which would probably make it easier to predict winners).

He can do whatever he wants tbh, pretty sure it's rather easy for him to do so considering the fact that his initial decision of removing Bitcoin from allowed payments was already for his pump and dump schemes, I don't think anyone would be confused if he ever went back to Bitcoin, whether it really be because of Bitcoin going green or not (since he only really used it as an excuse imo). Not to mention that even if he did, it'd only do small waves.

And tbf, Elon (Tesla) accepting Bitcoin was big back then because they were one of the first.

Well, it was a matter of time really, big companies (crypto or not) would naturally try to advertise themselves on the global stage, I'm just glad all in all that they were allowed to (Ik FIFA already did accept some crypto related stuff). As for being able to spread the crypto stuff well, it depends on what you mean by "know". There's the instance of someone knowing the word crypto, that it's related to this and that, but there's also the instance of knowing crypto as a user of it. Kinda like how I know that Redbull is a popular energy drink, but that's it. I don't use it, nor do advertisements make me want to use it, if that makes actual sense.

I don't think it's supposed to be stable, the market is way too volatile for it to be one. Not to mention that demand would only continuously increase in the following years imo, and the maximum supply of Bitcoin wouldn't be reached till a century more iirc? And I hardly doubt being stable would be a thing, we would still be seeing fluctuations every now and then even if Bitcoin were to reach its max supply by then. Let's not even mention this month in that case, it wouldn't happen. Though if you were talking about the big fluctuations in the market back then, I wouldn't say it's impossible, but it wouldn't be that often anymore.

True, OP got caught in the moment which was rather unfortunate. Nothing we can do though, it gets to the best of us sometimes, I wouldn't really blame OP fully for it, but he does have to suffer the consequences for having his actions like that.

I really wouldn't consider you being unlucky to be false, even the most sensible gamblers that manage their money would still lose it if unlucky, just that they had better decision makings in that they only bet what they can afford to lose. AS for you well, you were really unlucky, with a winning chance of 80% you lost quite a lot of times in the span of a few minutes.

But this would rely more on skill instead of luck really. It is a good idea, but I wouldn't consider casinos actually adding such things. It might be better to add some factors of luck instead, like hmm, being able to use different characters, having different stocks of life (randomly generated at the start), or maybe even handicaps if possible. Or maybe hmm, turn it into a card game instead, with each card letting you do something each turn (may be a punishment or a reward of sorts).

And it also recovered way past the initial position it had before the crash. I think that speaks volumes for itself on how Bitcoin is compared to the stock market. I wouldn't say that it couldn't happen, but the odds are kinda (really) low imo. I wouldn't even know what factors would be needed to even have the chance of it even happening, but I reckon it'd be REALLY big.

I honestly think no one believed Bitcoin to be able to survive the crash, so people just sold theirs back when Covid started, but then it came back up. So chances are, next time something similar happens, I don't think Bitcoin would still crash, or well, the chances would be low imo.