The true crypto space is actually not worse than the centralized space we are trying to break free from.  Those who what it conquered or destroyed (or both) are using every possible tricks and means with their huge resources to make it lose credibility. One of the ways they try to do this is to make the space look really bad and turn many people against it.
Not saying that true cryptospace is not without  problems, but it's not as bad, deceptive, tyrannical, dictatorial, non-transparent, oppressive, lawless, secretive etc as the space  control by the "entity". Whether you believe it or not, we are all victims of their dictatorship as long as you are a human. All the powers and controls is centered around their god (satan). His aim now is to completely take over of this world. Satan is very real my friends and he rules over this world through servants and devices. But GOD, the CREATOR of heaven and earth is the ultimate RULER or KING 👑.. No one, not even an evil entity anywhere in the "universe" can dare go against HIS Will without paying a great price. Nothing can go against the CREATOR's will. HIS Powers is Great and Unlimited. There is nothing HE cannot do. HE knows our every thoughts and actions.
We need to win this battle by depending on HIM alone and doing what pleases HIM. We need to justify his mercies, love and protections for us by being better, more moral than our "accuser" and his agents. GOD hears everything he accuses us of but HE wants us to prove him wrong by doing what is right.

Just read the definitions of the term to understand it better. The problem with such belief is that, if it's wrong then it will be leading many people astray. You don't trust informations from people who depend on themselves or evil spirits instead of depending on GOD.
So, any heavenly sign or body that should known, learn or study must be in accordance with the Word of GOD. There are lots of mysteries about things up there.. I know little, but the knowledge were/are from GOD not human knowledge. So, I would depend entirely on GOD for such thing in order not to be led astray.

Well, it's depends on what people are betting on about animals. It's not like animal fight or other violent betting on animals. The Op clearly stated that the bet or prediction is about the animal migration. I think it's a good thing they're predicting that as long as there are set  boundaries or rules that must not be crossed in the course of the bets.
I believe people could predict the migration fairly well with the right information or knowledge. Such people could be talents anyone who study or is interested in shark migration could depend on.

Here is a situation am I trying to make sure they are conscious of: "imagine someone bets over 1 million dollars for massive increase the country's case", and many people bet against it but the bettor becomes desperate and goes to the country or use other means to increase the number deaths in the country in order to win the bet. This can happen, that is why I don't like the idea of betting on crisis or betting on what could cause crisis or any other evil. I insist that bets should be moral otherwise it shouldn't be allowed...

Well, football/soccer is actually one of the games we believe shouldn't be part of the allowed games in the crisis because it violate the health safety rules of social distancing. It actually creates the risk of players bump against each, coming very close to each other and spreading the disease. The case could be different where the spectators are if they will social distance or space properly.... and the players have to accept to take the risk for the sake of fan.
 The most important thing is to ensure that no one breaks the health safety rules, but It will be hard for the players not to break the rules due to the nature of the game. If rules can be followed strictly and the players health safety guaranteed, then they could go ahead.
Hope they will let in less than stadium capacity to avoid crowds.

I think it'd better for people like Op to combine paid jobs that are related to what they're learning at their education centers.  If Op is learning agriculture for example, he/she could do agric-related jobs like farming... In this way , what is learnt at his/her edu center can be applied at his paid work and what is learnt at work can help his education.

I think the family members will need to input this together and receive the final instruction together. If they are not together, the sound of the alarm could be reduce to a minimum level, probably with no option to off the alarm completely. The alarm could come with a red light that could be activated aswell until the family members are together to input their codes and answer their short questions

Don't banks have physical structures in your location? Or was that an error or you mean online banking or probably something else?

 There are couple of inheritance services for Bitcoin as far as I can tell. If you want something simple, just have some company build you a simple alarm device that has to ring every two months or so, and can only be turn off with a code you control or can be turn off by trusted/reputable members of your family incase you are no longer available to turn it off. But you'll have to give the members of your family different secret codes each that they all need to input into the device each to turn off its alarm. Once each member input their code, the device responds with something like "is my owner (or the owner's name used instead) still alive?" if they click yes, the device goes back to another long month of silence... If no is clicked by everyone, the device instructs them where to find your Bitcoin/crypto keys.

I think people should be more interested in the quality of projects they are participating in, and less on their investments "mooning" in the future.
 I think the projects you choose to invest in have to be very useful or potentially very useful, without compromising on crypto-decentralization and safety standards. Their developers must be sincere, fast, very talented, skilled, committed, principled, focused etc

Well, this is part of reasons transactions should be recorded on decentralized/shared ledgers that should remain unchanged/immutable.

I'd suggest that before a coin mixing service mixed coin for people, it should try to make sure that its customers have something that can identify them, and such identifiers or personal/private identifications have to be controlled by their owners/customers and also distributed on a shared decentralized network/system, in a thoroughly encrypted/cryptic  and immutable form.    The activities generated after  mixing coins for customers could then be linked to the customers' encrypted personal identities. If a serious crime or violation is committed with the mixed coins (output), it can be tagged and investigated by law enforcement people. The tagged coins could be destroyed once its owner have been found guilty of the crime, his/her encrypted identity decrypted/de-anonymized.... then virgin/new coin generated as replacement for the tainted one. If the coin has been negatively tagged but now controlled by innocent new owner, the tag could aswell be removed from the coins once the former owner who committed the crime have been justly convicted.
 I prefer the burning/destroying of coins that have been tainted by people who have been convicted after committing serious crimes with them. You burn the coins and another are immediately created as replacement!

Are you suggesting that Lottery is gambling? If that is what you're suggesting then you could aswell be saying that countries that ban gambling but allow lottery or lottery-like betting games/competitions still allow gambling?

  Lottery bets should simply be seen as a way a people or community can randomly redistribute their small occasional contributions, pooled-fund, pooled-valuables, more responsibilities etc to their lucky members.
I think the current model I'm familiar with could be improved or made in a way that more members/winners get the distributed funds/things.


Well, I have bet on lottery before, probably one or  few times when I was kid/teen. We bet with little amount we could afford to lose, I don't consider that gambling. Many years ago, I was quite lucky in a  lottery-kind of competition that does not involve people betting directly with money... but I didn't scale through the final round. The lucky ones went through. I would not have complained or felt bad then if I didn't spend too much for ticket. I couldn't afford the ticket fee, but I could not afford to stop because I was already in the middle of the competition. This was something you would think was free lottery but they "charge" you huge amount in the middle of the competition. That is a clear gambling in betting/lottery space... It appears like free lottery/betting but with huge hidden ticket fee i couldn't afford.

The question should be, why shouldn't  companies like PayPal develop crypto  platforms that are compatible with the Ideals of Cryptocurrency, like decentralization, transparency, immutablity, censorship resistant, privacy-friendly/anonymity-friendly, trustless/permissionless, self-custody, safe/secure, etc. Is it that they can't build such platforms or they just have different agenda that conflict with crypto ideals?
 I would not recommend things I do not believe in or trust to people. Doing so will be hypocrisy. Well, people who prefer the centralized platforms shouldn't put in too much crypto in them, or they could preferably use the non-custodial ones.

The problem is not the Anonymity. Anonymity is part of the feature of true Cryptocurrency. Without it, a decentralized network could be vulnerable to multiple  attack types.
A good developer can go through kyc verification while still remaining anonymous if his/her real verified identities can be immutably/permanently linked to his/her decentralized account. The developer can then create anonymous account/accounts from the verified identities, which can be unmasked or de-anonymized by the network if he/she commits a serious crime, like hacking, stealing of funds etc

Part of the problems with Defi is that it's an ecosystem that tolerate taking big financial and security risks on new platforms that haven't been thoroughly or well tested.  I read somewhere that the platform was even audited. An auditor/auditors probably gave the platform a pass mark. So, what then went wrong? Most likely was audited by unqualified, compromised , or few auditors... it wasn't unedited well enough etc

What exactly would bettors be betting on? On cure, the spreading of the disease, etc?
Well, I believe it's immoral to benefit or gain from the health crisis in certain ways. I'd probably tolerate it if it's beneficial or have good impact on the health crisis. Unfortunately people could eventually become greedy/desperate, cause alot of health problems to win "hugh" bets if there is no effective rules to prevent it.

Seems you have similar problem with primedice and now luckygames.io in space of two days. I wonder if you are talking about thesame site/incident or it's a seperate incident? If this is true, it could be because they find you suspicious due to the hugh amount or for something else that goes against their terms or triggered their system.
$10,000 sound like alot of money(depending on your economic status) that shouldn't be risk on a betting site you probably don't understand well.

Not just the shark getting hurt, also those who wish to take big risk (gamblers) on such bets.

I prefer not to have this go on if what they choose is to gamble rather than bet responsibily or safely. Gambling shouldn't be encouraged atall... only safe and responsible bets. Good bettors should be able to predict the sharks journey without taking big financial risk.

My major problem with the current centralized kyc model is the risk it exposes people to. Your valuable private data could be hacked, abuse, misused, etc by those who have access to them. Imagine the risk you will be exposed to if your home address, your phone number, date of birth and other private information is access by dangerous people.

I think people should trade without kyc, but if kyc become necessary, a decentralized kyc system should be used instead. With this, everyone controls his/her private data, verification is done by the network in a crypto-friendly manner and verified information is hashed and used for authentications.

Could work with a well decentralized token. If you centralized it, you could have problems with the government of the land if it's not regulated by them. Just keep things well decentralized, transparent/open, immutable, and follow the country's good laws (plus your own good rules) and you won't have much problems with the country, depending how law abiding and just the country is.
Another solution is to create a good community in isolated areas, with its own "internet", and run such business with the token. The token still has to be  very decentralized in this case, and the community law-abiding, with its activities transparent

I wonder if the site is decentralized.   I would prefer to do this on decentralized platforms so we don't experience as situation where a site gain too many users and eventually require the unsafe/risky kyc model due to pressure from typical regulators. I like the non-custodial approach though.

I think Decentralized exchanges can do even better if their developers understand that they can do what Centralized exchanges can do, both efficiently and fast.
Once you understand what "decentralized" actually means as a developer, it shouldn't be that difficult to build a simple DEX that can compete effectively with the CEXes. And it's important to build a well or actual decentralized exchange, if you don't want too much problems in the future.
The exchanges have to meet this criteria to be considered well decentralized and safe 👇

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5281774.msg55370333#msg55370333