If you take a look at Jochen Hoenicke's mempool representation for the last two days, you can see how the fees started dropping between 21 and 22 April. In the last 24 hours, there were many windows for 1-2 sat/vByte transactions, and that's something we haven't seen in a long time.

I have no idea what caused the sudden drop, as the mempools are slowly filling against with +15k of unconfirmed transactions.
I am also confused with your statement that every time you send BTC in the past, you had to pay 10 sat/vByte or more. Before this Ordinals nonsense begun, I have done many transactions paying 1 to 1.3 sat/vByte that got confirmed relatively quickly. 

Do you check the state of the mempools manually or do you just rely on whatever the software you use suggests? You should always do your own manual checks.

The tools of control will change but they will always be there. I am not as optimistic as you are. Traditional fiat will be replaced with digital programmable money. And people will gladly accept it. That's the new face of control. A complete history of your income and spending power. If you aren't an obedient little citizen, they'll just turn off certain ways in which you can spend your money. No more hobbies for you. Next time, you will think hard before criticizing and badmouthing Big Brother because they will place additional limitations on you than just your hobbies. I just wonder what event will initiate this new world.

The first time I heard about Bitcoin, I didn't know what it was, but I certainly didn't have a physical asset in mind. I had already worked with some other electronic payment systems and thought it was something like that. A new trend that will soon the die just like everything else does. Fast forward several years later, and here I am.

The first sentence in the whitepaper tells you what bitcoin is. Any source that explains it used the words digital, virtual, electronic, etc. None of that should associate you with a physical asset. It wouldn't even make sense or make the global payment system more efficient. Me possessing physical bitcoins doesn't make it easier for me to pay someone in South America.

Stake is already a renowned name in gambling circes. Maybe their marketing team figures they don't need to invest that much money in bonuses anymore. They are already one of the best crypto casinos with a good share of the market and that won't change. They invest a lot into promoting and advertising the brand.
I don't know how BCgame is doing, and what's the motivation behind them abandoning their rakeback program, though.

Maybe he means PlayBetr. That brand doesn't exist anymore and has merged with Betcoin. PlayBetr now redirects to a new.betcoin domain, while the old Betcoin site still works. After a while, the old site will also shut down, and only the new one will continue to operate.

Since I have no idea if it's a genuine hardware wallet or not and Google doesn't either, I am going to remove it from the table for everyone's sake. I don't want its name up there with real hardware wallets so as not to give anyone any wrong ideas.

No. Rollbit Razer never replied to me. I sent the PM on 12 April. I doubt he didn't see it. I guess he didn't consider it important to respond and inform me about that. That's on him.

This is a copy of the message I sent to Rollbit Razer:
 

Perhaps OP wasn't telling the truth or he gave up. He hasn't been online for 10 days.
Since Rollbit Razer didn't want to reply over PM, all I can do is ask one more time publicly: Which mediation service(s) can players contact if they have a sports betting-related complaint?

Both Passport and the ColdCard might not fit everyone's interpretation of an easy-to-use hardware device. Passport is airgapped, requiring users to work with QR codes and camera scans. It's not difficult to learn, but is different if you have gotten used to the USB-connected Ledgers and Trezors.

Additionally, ColdCard isn't open-source. They have verifiable code, but nothing is released under an open-source license. I have said before that if I am an end-user interested in checking and verifying the code myself, ColdCard allows me to do that. So, that's ok. The reasons why they aren't open-source should be of secondary importance.   

Just do the best you can and don't bother yourself too much with the amounts. You will never have one full bitcoin, so what? Do you know how many millionaires and billionaires there are in this world? Many of them will never own 1 BTC either because they are scarce and only 21 million units will exist.

Use any amount you have to make your life better and easier. Don't compare yourself to anyone else. Regardless if it's to a person with 100 BTC, or one with 0.001 BTC. It can all turn around in the blink of an eye.   

You are the one who will be putting certain discussions on ignore, so do it properly. Check what the thread is about, and if you absolutely hate it, remove it from your field of vision. It shouldn't be an automatic thing that relies on keyword filtering because there would be too many issues with it. 

Wait, is that Crypto Guard some sort of fake/scam device or what am I missing. Was its whole purpose to infect a computer, steal sensitive information, etc.?

I have seen pictures of those before. I think those mini Trezors are Russian. Allegedly, they are based on Trezor's original code, but who knows if that is true or not. They might be genuine cheap copies of Trezor One's for the Russian market, but they may as well have malicious code in them. I have no idea if anyone ever checked the code of those devices in depth. 

My guess is that if you clicked on the confirm button, Binance would start checking your transaction data. They would look if you have the needed amount of coins in your wallet and that you are sending the BTC to a valid address. The entered address wouldn't pass the test. 1EZJTPt5thSBE8XaMGHHrePAt53DcQxdBg is a normal BTC address, 1EZJTPt5thSBE8XaMGHHrePAt53DcQxdBh is an invalid one. You can check that on any blockchain explorer. Enter the first one, and it will show you its transaction history. But for the second one, the site will tell you that the address doesn't exist or is invalid (depending on what type of error the service was configured to show).

You can easily check that with a software or hardware wallet. The client shouldn't allow you to create the transaction using the 2nd addy. When you send BTC through Ledger Live, the first step is entering the receiving address. When you enter a correct one, the continue button gets enabled. Paste a non-existing one and you won't be able to click on continue, and an error message informs you that you made a mistake.

Don't take my word for it, but I think it was nothing at all over Tron. You would get 0 USDT, for example. Nothing else.

I have never tested it, but maybe if you deleted all your posts in those threads, it might work!? I am just guessing. If you have no posts there, no one can reply to those non-existing posts. Hence, you won't see those replies if you click the "Show new replies to your posts" button.

I am not sure if you misunderstood me or I misunderstood you lol with the part where you said "It makes a lot of sense." We are saying the same thing. Did you see it differently?

Bitcoin addresses (I assume similar rules apply to the addresses of other cryptocurrencies) have a 4-byte checksum in the end. That number sequence protects against making copy/paste mistakes with addresses. Take a BTC address, paste it into your wallet software and change one of its characters, and the software will tell you that the address is invalid or non-existing. And you can't send to such an address, maybe not even with the worst type of wallet. More than only one character would have to change for the checksum to be OK: 

I have never seen that Crypto Guard hardware wallet before in my life. It seems like the Internet doesn't know anything about it either when you enter that name in a Google search. What do I call it? Is Crypto Guard the whole name for it? Is there a website or other source with more info about this device? I am curious what the price of it was.

I am not worried about Bitcoin being hacked and the world governments destroying it that way. The whole movement has reached a point where the enemy would have to put in significant efforts to even begin such a process. Bitcoin's POW and its mining infrastructure could get attacked. Bitcoin's known developers could be targeted because they are a threat to national security, they destroy the climate, kill polar bears, help to fund terrorism, money laundering, tax evasion, and the usual government propaganda.

An agreed upon mining ban across the biggest territories with the most hashrate would be a blow. Sure, miners could move to other countries, but not if their equipment gets confiscated due to fabricated charges. The same equipment that could then maybe be used to challenge the longest chain.

I don't trust power-hungry white men in expensive suits, and the world is full of them.   

It's got nothing to do with notifications. It's about what you see when you open a specific sub-forum. For example, look at Meta right now.

A few threads in Meta that I regularly see at the top include:

Merit & new rank requirements
Report plagiarism (copy/paste) here. Mods: please give temp or permban as needed
Wall of fame / shame. Shit posts so bad that they are actually funny
Save your nice merit records here - LAST UPDATE: 06/03/2023

Let's imagine that I want to be active in Meta but I don't want to see the above threads or some other ones I don't think are interesting to me personally. However, it makes no sense to me to ignore the users who created those discussions because I have nothing against them and I might enjoy there other discussions. Putting Meta on ignore is also out of the question. In those cases, it helps to put only certain threads on ignore, so as to not have to look at them every time you open a particular board. It has nothing to do with your watchlist or post notifications.

Preporuka za film Babylon.
Diego Calva, Margot Robbie i Brad Pitt u glavnim ulogama.
Jako zabavan film za gledati iako traje 3 sata. Radnja je smještena u 20-im i 30-im godinama i pokazuje rast i propast jedne mlade glumice i režisera. Film je bio i nominovan za nekoliko Oskara ali nije ništa osvojio.

Inače trenutno gledam seriju Better Call Saul. Iz nekog razloga joj nisam prije htio dati šansu jer sam mislio da je ništa drugo nego jeftin spinoff od Breaking Bad. Naravno pogriješio sam.

Ma i oni su svjesni da neće uspjeti zabraniti kripto niti im je to cilj. Gledaće da limitiraju Američke državljane da se igraju sa USD stablecoinima. A USDC i USDT će licencirati, čitaj regulirati da mogu i njega i njegove korisnike cijediti po potrebi, lakše naplačivati porez, i kazne za ne igranje po pravilima. Stavljaju ih pod krilo FED-a pa će onda vremenom krenuti zahtjevi, prohtjevi i zamrznuti računi ako se ne udovolji njihovim željama. 

Prema tom tweetu, Američko zakonodavstvo će moći odlučivati ko će biti licencirani stablecoin a ko ilegalni i nelicencirani. Pošto im je lakše staviti šapu na USDC i USDT kad i ako bude potrebno, to će onda dozvoliti a tokene kao što su DAI pokušati zabraniti. Zanimljivo je da DeFi bar za sad ne diraju. Vjerovatno još ne znaju kako će. Mislio sam da će i to strpati u isti koš kao i DAI. 

I don't think they can duplicate 20. But the problem is, if you check only the first 3-4 and the last 3-4, how are you going to know if the rest matches or not?

I can't remember the thread where this was discussed but it was probably in the technical Bitcoin boards. Someone created a discussion showing that scammers can match more than the usual couple of starting and ending characters in a bitcoin address from a huge pool of already generated addresses. I don't think it was used in a scheme to scam someone, but to show the current capabilities. Doublechecking only a few characters in the beginning and end is getting less and less safe. Do more for your own safety. 

The scammers didn't send anything at all. The transactions were empty, they only paid the network fees.