There seems to be some misunderstanding

If you want to keep all your actions in some storage to retrieve them later for whatever purpose (let's assume that), you would still need that storage and some software to manage the storage in a useful and easy way. In other words, you would need a database and a DBMS (which stands for a database management system, just in case).

And blockchain is a special variety of a database crafted specifically for resiliency and redundancy (a distributed database, to be exact). Indeed, you can go with a simple database and DBMS which handles it like SQLite, for example, but that doesn't mean you won't have to save all this data somewhere for future retrieval if that was your point

Common sense and the law of large numbers don't live well together

More specifically, we may in fact reach such a state when the volatility will be so high across the markets that you won't be able to reliably determine the price at any given moment. This is unlikely to happen in the foreseeable future anyway, but technically, that would pretty much count as "not enough coins in existence" to satiate the demand

Ironically, the demand itself may not necessarily be very high at that point. It is the supply which must be low, exceptionally low at high prices. That seems to be a theoretical possibility with assets whose total supply cannot be increased. For example, it is not possible with gold because at higher prices gold production will expand quickly


For a currency that effectively means an ultimate failure as a means payment (i.e. as a currency, yeah). But that's totally okay for a speculative asset in the state of a bubble

Even if it is not, you can still safely assume it is

Really, why would a legitimate exchange associate itself with a scammy one? Anyway, as I had been using WEX myself in the past, so I tried to restore my password (which I allegedly forgot) using the Restore Password form, and I received a notification that there was no such user as myself. That basically means that those who run this WEX copycat have no access to the original database of WEX users, as simple as it gets

The bottom line is that no one in his sane mind should ever even consider this "exchange", let alone actually sending their coins to this rip-off. It will be gone as soon as they manage to receive some money. And then you will see another WEX-like fraud spring up somewhere


There are better ways to lose money

Bitcointalk Profile Name: deisik
Bitcointalk  Profile Link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=156665
Rank: Legendary
Post Count (incl. this post): 22026
SegWit BTC Address: bc1qhdl0cte0eapjaqftrmf07sgh88kngjru827cvg

Will add sig etc if accepted

Bitcoin Cash does exactly that (even if it is not a true Bitcoin)


The latter doesn't necessarily follow from the former

It works wonderful with valuable things that cannot be (easily) substituted with similar things performing the same role or function, and in that case a decrease in supply translates directly into an increase in demand and price (sometimes even with a vengeance). I'm not sure if this is the case with Bitcoin as its volatility prevails over any changes in the total supply (cp. the change in supply over the last couple of years with the price swings we see almost daily). In simple terms, it is more complicated

Apart from that, there is another factor which should be paid precious attention to, and that is utility. If utility goes down along with supply (a possible scenario), then the rise in demand is not guaranteed at all (so neither is the price). In other words, Bitcoin may become so rare that it may lose all utility it might have, and then it will quickly deteriorate and turn into a worthless asset (also a possible scenario). The same thing is going to happen if someone buys 99% of all bitcoins, just in case


I hope you are proved right in the end

Yet, Bitcoin has been in the spotlight for at least 5 years by now, so you can't possibly say that it is "early days still and anything could happen" (people had been telling that in 2013). Indeed, anything can happen (regardless of maturity) but if nothing particularly good happened in the last few years in terms of "many more uses" (more specifically, uses not related to trading and gambling), it leaves plenty of doubt whether and to what extent things are going to change in the future. So what is going to change that didn't or failed to change already?

These and similar thoughts had been mainstream here like 4-5 years ago

When people really believed that Bitcoin can substitute fiat currencies one day (and that day was not too far in the future) and seriously expressed concerns that Bitcoin's denomination won't suffice and thus should be expanded to, say, 16 figures after the decimal point (instead of outright increasing the total supply)

Now such ideas seem completely out of place (and time) as Bitcoin is not serving the world even in its present state. Sorry if this is not what you wanted to hear but it is better to see what is really going on, however unpleasant it might be. Other than that, what you suggest is what altcoins already do, effectively expanding Bitcoin's supply

The phrase itself ("decentralized economy") is rather vague and may mean a myriad of different things

So there can be plenty of useless and meaningless argument just because people have not agreed on "naming conventions" beforehand. But still, as far as economic matters are concerned, these can be quite decentralized. Truth be told, you can well consider them chaotic on the level of households and other single economic agents, even though you can definitely trace certain patterns when you move higher to the level of national economy as such (the inference being that there are some laws at work here)

In this way, unless we are talking about North Korea and their likes (I know there are no likes, though Venezuela comes pretty damn close), most economies in today's world are already decentralized (read, internally chaotic) where the amount of government intervention is kept to a possible minimum. But this minimum differs from country to country, of course, from a laissez-faire type of economy (Switzerland and many other European countries) to a more regulated kind (Russia and China come to mind instantaneously)

Let me risk an answer

Maybe, Tesla is a monopolist (of sorts) primarily because it or its buyers in the US are massively subsidized by the American government, while other companies (read, from Europe and Japan) trying to make electric cars have to face the harsh economic reality without the recourse to government financial support in the form of tax reductions or direct subsidies to the buyers of these cars?

And the harsh reality is that such cars are very expensive in terms of both production and exploitation, especially if we consider all relevant expenses, both direct and indirect costs as well as delayed costs, i.e. the ones that you incur when you are getting rid of your old electric car or its worn-out parts such as batteries, for example (think nuclear power here with its quite devastating environmental impact many years after a nuclear power station is decommissioned)

In fact, no one should rely on luck, not only professionals

As those who do are looking for a disaster (think of reckless gambling here). However, even if you are not relying on luck, you shouldn't fall for the other extreme either, i.e. not hope for luck in the games where luck plays an ever-important and vital role. What I mean to say is that when you encounter it, you should be ready to take advantage of it and do that extremely fast as the others (the ones you are playing against) won't hesitate, so you must not hesitate either. But that means you should be prepared for it and kind of expect it to come your way any moment, even when you least expect it (pardon the pun)


Ironically, but the same goes for luck. You should train your mind in such a way so as to not lose an opportunity whenever it presents itself

The word would spread quickly which would make the whole strategy useless


Unless you are a casino owner yourself (or work for one)

Though there is no guarantee here, either, as the competition in the field is tight, and it is damn hard to attract gamblers to your site (you have to earn your reputation first, then keep it up at all costs and at all times). Besides, you still need to know your thing as many new casinos ended belly up in the past due to poor bankroll management when a deep pocket rolled big time, won and left the casino with nothing to go on

If it didn't happen, it is unlikely to happen in the future

I refer to indie developers here. I'm not much of a gamer myself, but as far as I know many role-playing games (or whatever they are called) have their internal currencies for use inside the game (i.e. to buy things to raise your level in the game's pecking order). Crypto is a competitor to them, so why should they care?

As I see it, it is a matter of control but you can't control crypto, so it is kind of banned from being used inside such games (I mean, as a game currency). However, we can always gamble our coins away at online casinos where cryptos have established a pretty firm foothold since the very beginning

By doing this, you are still relying on fiat as the underlying asset

In fact, there is no way to determine the real value of Bitcoin as it all comes down to measuring its value in or against some fiat currency (dollars or otherwise). Technically, we need goods priced directly in bitcoins if we want to accurately assess how much 1 bitcoin is really worth. Ironically, this is exactly where Bitcoin sucks most. And I'm not sure what you mean by referencing time in your post. Care to explain?


Not gonna happen, sorry

I guess this is called selection bias

The whole lottery business revolves around this thing. People start buying the lottery tickets when they see that someone wins big time as the lottery organizers make a pretty damn good show out of it, with the indirect but strong and persistent emphasis on "you can win too". Obviously, only few win, but you can't sell back your now useless ticket, so who cares about you when the show must go on?

This is certainly true if you are using Bitcoin

As you can't bet more than a few bitcoins due to the limits put in place by casinos (they are not fools), so starting with 1 satoshi and 50% win chance, you are signing off your death sentence. It is not uncommon to see losing streaks that would theoretically end in a few hundred bitcoins (read, the loss of your balance is sort of guaranteed)

Anyone can try that with doges and see for themselves. Using the doge coin itself somewhat alleviates this problem but then other factors kick in. For example, many casinos don't allow to start rolling with the lowest denomination (I talk about Dogecoin specifically here), which quickly makes the whole effort an exercise in futility and stupidity

I'm curious what really makes you think so

The ultimate risk remains the same, which is losing your entire balance. And the more rolls you are to make, the higher are your chances of busting. Further, to be immune to the losing streaks that do happen every now and then (it's called variance), you have to use coins like doges (since with anything else you are set to lose all, and pretty fast at that), but then you'll be essentially wasting your time. Yes, I tried that (in fact, still trying), and I don't see this approach very useful other than for fun and entertainment only


Are you one of these gamblers?

Define invest here

If by investment and investors you actually mean speculation and profiteers, these folks don't care what asset to invest in as long as it gives them enough opportunity to earn dough. Litecoin fits this scheme perfectly which you seem to admit and agree with in the second half of your reply. The point is, both Bitcoin and Litecoin are speculative assets, so there is not much difference between the original and the copycat in this regard. And while you are busy defining the invest thing, also don't neglect to define "the most promising coin" thing as well since different people may have very different ideas on what a coin may "promise" them (and how much, for that matter)

They seem to have updated the user statistics snippet and now it shows unabbreviated stats. Here're mine for the inquiring minds (just a little short of 2M bets):



Though not much to brag about in terms of profits rolled in

If by Satoshi you refer to Bitcoin of Satoshi Nakamoto fame, then you'll get busted in the blink of an eye

Well, within a week or two or after a few hundred thousand rolls (probably, less). The only way to consistently profit by martingale is to use doges and start rolling at the minimum possible denomination (i.e 0.00000001 Doge). Then if you have like a few million dogecoins, you can actually be immune to 20+ consecutive losing rolls. It is simply not possible with Bitcoin as most casinos limit the max bet amount by just a few bitcoins, so even if you were Nakamoto incarnate, your millions of bitcoins would be of no help anyway

Ко мне обращались люди с конкретными заказами в моей теме в русскоязычном сегменте форума, поэтому я бы не стал делать таких обобщений. Хотя, конечно, большая часть предложений - это какие-то дети, которым просто нечем заняться

Now we seem to be on the same page and understand each other

Increasing balance in order to lower the odds of busting is the main theme in my Martingale Revisited thread here (for the inquiring minds). The thing is, if you are already immune to 20+ consecutive losses, you can just stay that way and tweak the martingale settings to earn more with the same level of risk as your winnings pile up. But casinos already know that and they do everything to stop you from exploiting the probabilities in your favor

Further, as I explained in my previous posts here, with this setup it is not like you either bust all or earn just dust. To repeat, there is a lot of in between. The point is, you will necessarily see a lot of variance in your profits before the clock strikes. That would allow you to increment your killing streak faster than you may think and thus postpone your "time of death" moment further into the future