I didn't know that FTX was a direct port to asian markets. Are those countries using binance now?
Also, i thought it has users from united states, so i had to google and it was seperate operation. So i guess my question is that is FTX.US totally off the hook? How they or their us customers are not affected when 130+ companies are?
If this stat is for real then maybe FTX.US is really safe. Which also means FTX only stole from other countries and the money of celebrities promoting them wasn't really stolen? SBF is okay to steal money from someone else money outside the US so he isn't going to jail and are free to speak to the public. Nice touch. And because of this, SEC Gensler now wants to have control overseas. |
|
|
|
I think the reason for the popularity of this wallet is that it is invited by....
The same people who believe that the CEX you mention is something they should trust, surely believe that they should trust the Trust wallet just because it has "trust" in its name. If some kind of research were done, I have no doubt that a large percentage of those who use this wallet would probably admit that they use it because of the name, which is of course absurd in every way. Trust wallet is also promoted by CZ. This isn't originally developed by Binance team, they just bought Trustwallet and further developed it with a TWT token which has been tanking that's why its popularity increases. Trust is a close source project, it wouldn't be surprising that there is a backdoor to the wallet where the team has a copy of our seed. It's possible. You can't fully trust a team. |
|
|
|
Where did your question come from?
POI's part of verification, there is nothing to do with the wagering or deposit you're made. Casino never restricted any money to their business, even with only 10$ you still can gamble with them.
This is the first time, someone ask this question.
Yeah, I only saw this kind of requirements on loans or purchasing items in-terms since they will need to make sure that customers will have the capability to pay the borrowed money before the due date occur. Gambling doesn’t gives liability to all there users so this document is really not necessary to be relate on gambling unless casino offers loans to there players for bankroll then this document is important in regards to that matter. The question probably comes from this kind of thread as well. Someone asked about Stake asking for the source of funds. If you have a ton of money in the casino wallet yet you only have $500/month as pay check from your job, don't you think the casino will suspect something doesn't add up? |
|
|
|
|
It must be a typo writing USTD instead of USDT. Welcome to bitocointalk!
I must agree that making us register with names and compare it the next to our KYC might just get us a big problem. It's attractive to register through 120% signing bonus I assume when a user deposit coins. It will be more enticing if you make sports and games available to unregistered users.
|
|
|
|
Oh of course I’ve had these concerns and so should everyone else for that matter. That goes for whether you’re playing in downtown Vegas or is some local small town /city that just has some basic slot playing mini casinos. Where I live slot machine gambling as absolutely blown up. There’s a slot machine 🎰 in a store of some type at least every mile. There’s also next to no legitimate security. These things tend to stay open late too, so personally is only every play in the afternoon.
It must be more frequent to hear more of nabbing and robbing these days because of the economy and season combined. Any jobless person can think of snatching cash from someone who shows how much they have in public, especially a person wearing an expensive watch coming out of vegas, he is a target. Safer to just stay online casino, you wouldn't be worried about senseless killings like mass shootings or robbers. |
|
|
|
Everything is a trial and error. Maybe they just lose for now and this loss will make them learn and win in the future. It's always like that and some just take a long time for them to learn. The market is not easy to learn too. Never quit and if it's really possible, consult a shaman before trading.  If trading is really not the kind of skill that someone learns, he should just consider Hodling. Its safer. |
|
|
|
My thinking is exactly opposite! A small business must not accept cryptocurrency as payment. Usually a small business rolls over the money. They always need working capital to sustain and that working capital has to be in fiat unless and until their wholeseller accepts crypto. Also the price volatility can easily eat up their profit within a very short period of time.
So my personal recommendation is not to use crypto for a small business. They can have a service where a thind party converts the crypto immediately based on the current market rate, that's when it makes sense for the small businesses to accept cryptocurrency.
I agree, small business profits are much lower than big business, and cryptocurrencies are one of the most volatile assets, so it is easy to cause unnecessary losses if they use electronic money. But that's not the main reason, as Luzin mentioned: the legitimacy of cryptocurrencies that's the biggest hurdle businesses are facing. If governments legalize it and promote the use of cryptocurrency in the country, even if it is less profitable, businesses will consider using it to compete and attract customers. True that. The volatility is just not what they need for their business to grow. They couldn't make this to thier advantage, unlike the traders. What may just be good for them is accepting stablecoin just to prepare for customers who are willing to pay crypto. If I have a small business, this will be my route to go, And with it, I can easily invest BTC. |
|
|
|
Why do you think the government would issue their currency on a blockchain they don't own? This is almost impossible to happen for many reasons. But first off, the government needs the power to control the money. So using a network they don't own and control means they will lose that power. The government will always control the finances. Otherwise, they're powerless. Another reason is that the goal of Bitcoin and the goal of the government are not really compatible.
Governments issue money to banks, and look what happens. They create paper money that ends up in the hands of who knows. Them allowing stablecoins to be tied with money a bank "has" just means the next phase is coming. They will issue them on blockchains directly, just watch.  Now if they issue money to banks, we all can see whats going on. <3 They will issue money using blockchain in the future. That is expected to happen. That's what CBDCs are all about. But we should not be talking about Bitcoin's permissionless blockchain or Ethereum's blockchain. They won't issue money using those blockchains because they are not blockchains that the government can control. They will definitely be using private blockchains, their own blockchains that themselves have the authority to control. So let's forget about the government using existing blockchains for their currencies. That's not possible. The adoption of this CBDC with a new blockchain might not be massive since there is no user base yet. It could be a reason why they were suing some blockchain to gain control of it like the XRP. With Eth, the SEC may have control over it after all it's now a Security. and they could easily make users trade with this stablecoin. Just my theory. User base is not a problem with fiat currencies. If a government creates a CBDC and released a wallet for it, it is not like a small start-up company trying hard to gain attention from potential users. Anybody who is a citizen in whatever country will have to use its legal tender. The user base will always the entire population. The government don't have to steal a private blockchain in order to issue its CBDC. They have all the resources in the world. They could easily create a blockchain on their own and according to their own specific preferences. Its gonna be gradual since trust will be the issue with the new blockchain. Forcing people to go into thier blockchain might work the majority of the population anyway doesn't care about privacy but for those who are privacy-concerned individuals, it's not. If the word spread that CBDC is spying on them, they will eventually just avoid it unlike if the people have no choice. I think it's what happened in Nigeria, people are still not using CBDC. But if they take over stablecoins like Tether or USDC, it's a different thing. The ones who are already hiding from them are already there. |
|
|
|
|
Even without the push for CBDC central banks around the world have been limiting the amount of cash to withdraw. Only this time they are fast-tracking the use of CBDC in the country where people are also aware of BTC.
It's been a failure so there is the need to push CBDC harder to make it. If they are to fight this, it's best for people to also not deposit cash to keep the cash circulating.
|
|
|
|
The bad thing about this is that I am sure that the majority of the population will believe it. The digital euro, with which they are going to control all payments and be able to put an expiry date on it or block it if they feel like it, they have started to sell it as something that is convenient for the population, of course. Digital euro: a common European projectOn the subject of privacy, I'm laughing my head off: The first one is privacy. In our public consultation, 43% of respondents ranked privacy as the most important aspect of the digital euro, well ahead of other features. So it is clear that if we want the digital euro to be attractive, it needs to be designed in a way that meets people's privacy expectations.
We seek to ensure high standards of privacy for digital euro users. But full anonymity – such as offered by cash – does not appear a viable option in my opinion. It would contravene other public policy objectives such as ensuring compliance with anti-money laundering rules and combating the financing of terrorism. And it would also make it virtually impossible to limit the use of the digital euro as a form of investment – for example via holding limits or tiered remuneration – for which identities of users need to be known.
We should at least provide a level of privacy equal to that of current electronic payment solutions. So, no privacy. NONE! How can you trust a centralized entity who says that they will give you your privacy. The cabal behind Central Banks WILL LIE to you, and make everyone believe that CBDC is good for society, and WILL LIE to you and convince everyone that Bitcoin censorship-resistance = "bad". BUT CBDC should be encouraged by the community because it will make Bitcoin self-sovereignty and censorship-resistance more valuable. The majority of the population doesn't really suspect what else is there when the government tries to experiment on them. This is only happening in the US but different countries already hurry to digitize thier own currency thinking this will give convenience. How are they going to ensure compliance with anti-money laundering rules and combat the financing of terrorism if there is privacy? If they also want transparency then lets all just use the blockchain for everyone to see each account. |
|
|
|
|
Gambling or contest, doesn't matter.
He is just asking if there is something like this kind of game. I would also be interested to join like in a CSGO map and only 5 players per team and the team that wins get to earn the 50USD. If the team wins, they can divide the $50 among those who are still standing. It's a classic game that even the old-school can relate to.
|
|
|
|
But come on, if I have to provide all the documentation to be able to bet at Stake, they're not going to see me there, with all the options there are where you can deposit, bet and that's it.
I don't think you need ALL, they just need to match whether the funds you deposited were properly supported by whatever document you presented and if it fits I guess you're all fine. It'd be a problem if say you deposit $100 but only sent documented proof of getting $50. I reckon most would probably put up Salary in as proof anw (I reckon Sig campaign rewards would be included there instead?), so it'd probably be pretty easy for most to provide proofs if they wanted. Well, if you use your signature income for gambling, you should be covered... because every Signature campaign has some spreadsheet to show the deposits. You just have to show some proof of your ownership of the Bitcoin address where the funds are paid into (Signed Bitcoin address) I am lucky, because I have an original Pay slip and I can provide a new pay slip for every month... even though none of my salary are going into gambling. (It just pays for my other expenses, so that I can use my extra income for some gambling) That's a relief for signature participants. Those who earn from other campaigns or some who are just trading may just have some problems with this. But like usual, they may just ask for the source of funds for those high rollers. They're not asking just the KYC this time. Stake asking all these means other casinos will also do. Only the DEXes don't require documents. winning funds from another casino is not acceptable
That means the casino where you won those funds will ask for the source of funds from you. Maybe Stake will consider it if you show it to them. |
|
|
|
Why do you think the government would issue their currency on a blockchain they don't own? This is almost impossible to happen for many reasons. But first off, the government needs the power to control the money. So using a network they don't own and control means they will lose that power. The government will always control the finances. Otherwise, they're powerless. Another reason is that the goal of Bitcoin and the goal of the government are not really compatible.
Governments issue money to banks, and look what happens. They create paper money that ends up in the hands of who knows. Them allowing stablecoins to be tied with money a bank "has" just means the next phase is coming. They will issue them on blockchains directly, just watch. Now if they issue money to banks, we all can see whats going on. <3 They will issue money using blockchain in the future. That is expected to happen. That's what CBDCs are all about. But we should not be talking about Bitcoin's permissionless blockchain or Ethereum's blockchain. They won't issue money using those blockchains because they are not blockchains that the government can control. They will definitely be using private blockchains, their own blockchains that themselves have the authority to control. So let's forget about the government using existing blockchains for their currencies. That's not possible. The adoption of this CBDC with a new blockchain might not be massive since there is no user base yet. It could be a reason why they were suing some blockchain to gain control of it like the XRP. With Eth, the SEC may have control over it after all it's now a Security. and they could easily make users trade with this stablecoin. Just my theory. |
|
|
|
Maybe it's about crypto companies and projects start putting more effort in publishing apps that are supported by open source operating systems like Linux. Decentralization comes at a price. You can't make a "dapp" and publish it on only Microsoft, google play and app store and then think things will go on well.
Elon Musk already had some complaints about apple cutting their advertising on Twitter probably due to the recent "free speech campaign" by him, you can clearly see that apple is a political tool.
Twitter is also used by Elon to expose political parties so its a war. Twitter will be next that Apple will block and Cook might also want some cut to the altcoins that are to be integrated into accounts since Elon already mentioned he will add wallets on Twitter. If Apple continues to do all these, they may also be blocking the rest of the wallets on iOS. Trust Wallet could be his real target. |
|
|
|
|
Popular tokens and coins are already in the casinos. Once a coin gets popular, the casino has the initiative to cater to those users who want to bet those tokens like SHIB. WINK and WAGERR had been around but never did I see someone talking about the token being bet on.
I have been participating in torrent activity such as seeding and have gotten millions of BitTorrent (BTT), if it's going to be used on casinos, I'd probably use it to bet.
|
|
|
|
* Not Risky Maybe a better term is "less risky". Although we do know how volatile cryptocurrencies are compared to stocks, forex, gold, and real estate, at least responsible long-term investments negate the effects of constant ups and downs in the market. But I will never call long-term cryptocurrency investing not risky. If it is not risky at all then there is no need to create tips like watching its volatility and investing only a portion we can afford to lose. If there is no risk, then we can just all-in invest all our funds allocated for long-term goals. - I stand corrected for this you've mentioned Sir, thanks for the heads up. I just posted the wrong term for this one, anyway long term is good only if anyone are sure about the coin that will give a nice profit in the future. And the risk might only come in if you feel doubt about the coins you'd like to buy and at the end of the day you still like to invest in it. That is why the portion of invest what we can afford to lose is very suitable for the long term in my own assessment and perception as well. It's about investing in a currency that you actually own irrespective of how much its value could be because of the volatility. Because that's what you invest in. Not just because of the price consideration. You investing in USD/EUR today and you might actually see its price dipper when the inflation finally runs away. And the fact that they are in a bank account or stablecoins that are on the ETH network where can be seized, that's riskier. |
|
|
|
That's won't be enough to get all those victims for FTX and LUNA collapse since they're losing a lot of money there, but at least we can get something progressing in our crypto space. The good thing with PoR we can see that will make the current investor keep believing in Centralized Exchange. It could be enough if the PoR is more transparent. So far CZ only shows partial details of the PoR, they were not showing the liabilities which because of the number of users in Binance, there could be a lot of liabilities. AFAIK there are other exchanges that did show their PoR too but the same shenanigans. But despite all there I guess we're still going to continue to trade on them. The Crypto industry will not die. |
|
|
|
Some people receive lottery lucky number in dream and some even consult spirit to help them to guess the right lucky number, but I have not hard how effective that is but if it can aid in winning does that mean the spirit has the power to see the future to know the right lottery number?
This is the most belief i find all these years , People dreamed of Numbers and when they put bet in lottery (specially those 2 digits lottery) that the combination takes place and they won. but like what said by many (not of all) that this is a luck base game and you can never guess what will come without luck bringing you. A fortune teller consults the spirit all the time to foretell the client's fate, they should really be richer than Elon if they can really foresee which numbers to come out on the lottery. Unfortunately, they are also scams. Luck games like the lottery though are giving hope to people. My father keeps spending on these tickets and his drawer is full of these tickets. Never really see him win a dime. |
|
|
|
For me AVAX (avalanche) Is the coin i got good profit in this coin by investing 5 times.
First two times i got huge profits.
But after that not huge but that was also the good profit by holding same coin.
Or a single altcoin can sweep all of your funds in a single day. This is the risk of investing altcoins it's more risky than investing in Bitcoin and you will never know what coin would give you profit that's why you have to risk on investing even if it means losing your funds. As long as you can afford what you lose you're still fine because that's what investment but make sure you know what you are doing or else it could end up badly. A few people get lucky on investing with altcoins if they get profit but also there are unfortunate people who lost a lot after the investment. Fortunately, many of us just earn those tokens in bounty campaigns. I have some altcoins that made up to $20K. It's a huge win and a bounty participant just worked for 4-6 weeks. Lucky for those who sold after that because some of these tokens never rise again after a bear market. One token that I invested in was Cardano (ADA) when its price dipped to $0.02, I bought close to 17K ADA tokens. Sold them at $2.75. That's still a profit and bought back above $0.50 though so I'm at loss again. |
|
|
|
Why not is because there is Bitcoincore that's free. 3) most people do not trust hardware wallets.
Even when I was aware of it since its existence. I also don't trust HW. Although I haven't heard anyone got hacked or hardware wallet codes are altered, I can't just rely on the words of the company but I do think they are true to thier words in serving Bitcoin holders. Are the codes of these hardware wallets even open source? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
