And it isn't even only applicable to educating children. It's literally an idea that could help people control others in a way that could benefit them by letting them know what they're actually avoiding. You can't exactly say to avoid item x just because, at least let the person understand what it entails or what item x even does. It's a simple strategy to educate people and yet it still escapes their minds to actually do it. Leaving explanations behind could be deadly. Even introducing it to their child themselves may be the better option in some cases.

Yea no, that's a dumb idea. Even if crypto adoption was to increase, I still think fiat being left behind wouldn't really happen, or well, the government wouldn't exactly let it happen. Yes, Crypto adoption may help in trying to make usage of crypto in most expenditures happen, but in the end the centralized fiat would probably be improved upon and still be a top option when you consider convenience in the future. Not to mention that in the current scene of things, merchants who accept Bitcoin are way too little, not to mention most of them are big companies instead of the daily necessities type of stores.

Still rather against the idea of NFTs, though that might just be because of how the hype originally killed the idea of what an NFT could be. Still, I reckon I can accept these kinds of NFTs, they are a historical kind of NFT after all, plus if it helps them, even if I hate it, I'd still push for the idea since it is a big help for the country itself. Whether it's for remembrance or funds really, both reasons are good enough imo for people to accept them starting this kind of project. Hoping for the best for them.

How long was the time of you winning the jackpot, your account is locked, you being replied to by the game provider and the last time support contacted you? Cause honestly I'd probably give them a week at max, 3, 4 days at the minimum to check the issue out. Never experienced it so I'm just giving general numbers that most people wait for, just keep the communications up with the support team so that you're updated with what's happening, for all we know there may be more checks happening.

Additionally, assuming that the game provider checked "your" game with that reply may be hasty. Who knows, the casino may be holding the data for their own checking first, before sending it to the provider. In that case, you asking the provider and them telling you everything is done isn't wrong, but your situation isn't in those returned data.

That's how most tables of casinos work online though. If you're talking about the experience of seeing something different, well, it's mostly on the part of how the site portrays it or what medium they'd use, e.g, VR, 2d, or just straight-up flat with only names visible. I still don't think it's going to be a big thing really, I'd rather see the idea used in other types of games that would heighten the experience such as fps, mmos and stuff like that (though tbh, it's mostly the VR aspect and nothing else that would be added). Gambling? Nah. Could be a nice addition, but that's it, it's not a game-changer.

And I swear, every time someone mentions metaverse, It's literally just Minecraft.

Okay the only complaint here really is that they didn't let you incerase your limits, which lead to you trying to withdraw. But THAT action is against their TOS, which can clearly be read here:
https://duelbits.com/aml
To quote:
Now I couldn't find the "percentage" needed from there, maybe people who've experienced or seen it could tell (I didn't see it or didn't really take notice of it). So really, it's just you OP that didn't properly look at their TOS. Maybe you could've tried to do the KYC requirements they need, if that was okay with you anyway. Though I guess the opportunity is gone now.

It doesn't, well, at least if it is going to, hasn't affected the market yet. I honestly don't think it even is going to impact the market, even if it would, it'd be rather negligible. The biggest impact it could've had should've happened prior to or at the start of the war, and seeing nothing has really changed, I don't think it did anything. The market movement is still the general steady movement it has done in the past few weeks, it's the market sentiment itself (which may or may not include the war issue, but it certainly isn't alone on that).

Maybe, if they see that crypto has a big enough impact to affect the situation in Russia, though it won't likely happen since crypto is more of a personal thing.

I don't think so? I mean if there was going to be the so-called existence of "metaverse" where every nft can be connected, then it isn't really out of the way. Metaverse from what I understood simply acts as a central hub for the different types of games, tokes, services, etc., to be connected and accessible within each other, so a gambling den where you bet NFT's isn't that out of way, after all, if trading could exists within that space, then gambling would probably follow suite.

Though I'm still doubtful if such an existence would ever come really. Honestly, all of this is just hype imo, I still don't see how NFT's are being a thing.

Well, we use DEX then. I don't think it's that much of an issue, VPN's are a thing and should let you access exchanges if they were banned by your local ISP's (though it may result in a ban if you get found out, but still, being careful can bypass that), and if you don't want to do that, as I said earlier, DEX should still be easily useable. Plus, if they were to sanction CEX because of wanting to sanction Russia themselves from getting their money out, then sanction everything, from buying gold, stocks, other fiats, etc., otherwise, it's just a useless endeavor.

Not necessarily, parents aren't the only influence out there so even if they do good, if the kid was influenced outside by a bigger factor, then they could inevitably end up doing something contrary to what their parents were trying to teach. And in all honesty, with the existence of the internet, parents' influence can be at an absolute minimal most of the time since kids are learning on their own at a rapid pace.

Agree. An activity is not the one that's supposed to be blamed, it's always the person who does the activity, and then the person who influenced the prior person to do said activity. It's like blaming a knife for existing so that was why a killer was able to kill someone.

Unlikely, I guess. Drake is someone well known for being an avid fan of gambling, I reckon he can gamble away whatever he spent with his own money, and I guess that topic opened up (if it wasn't already) discussions to partner up with Drake himself. Plus I don't think he needs to stoop that low to nab a partnership with Stake, he's a big name himself, plus with his gambling tendencies, as long as he was noticed then I'm pretty sure he could have opened up discussions himself.

Glad for stake though, Drake should be a pretty good choice to promote their casino.

Yea I don't think that's going to happen. There wouldn't really be any big effects imo, casinos are just like a kind of business, and honestly, providers banning them doesn't seem like it's going to do anything, except for damaging businesses that have no actual effect on their economy. Honestly, no one even views gambling casinos as something that could help them, banned or not, so I don't think it's gonna happen.

Sanctions are there to persuade them from stopping, as well as to show the damages it could bring now and in the future. That's why sanctions with the SWIFT system, payment systems, etc., could really damage since their things that are needed most of the time to process stuff. Gambling isn't really one of them.

Nothing new really, pretty stable so far, today I reap profits, the next day I reap losses, and the cycle continues. DCA cycle still continues on so I'm still profiting even if a bit from the daily movements since I try to time my entries into small dips. The market hasn't really moved that much, well not enough to actually make me change the way I'm trading right now anw.

I still don't really feel the impact of the war on my trading, the market isn't really that heavily affected imo, it's just the usual movement of the market. Well at least, even if it did had one, it wasn't as big as most people expected it to be.

Isn't it never expect to become rich without taking any risks? Trying to learn something you'd want so that you can profit from it is a form of learning and investing (to yourself) at the same time. And it naturally comes with the risk of losing your time over doing something you may or may not even learn properly or may or may not actually make you earn money. Risking and investing is natural in the process of trying to do something, especially if it's an activity that you want to either be recognized or earn money from (or both).

Especially with the current state of things really, it isn't enough for just risks, you need to have an immense amount of luck or connections to actually make a name for yourself (money comes afterwards tbh).

Not unexpected, more companies would probably follow the same moves if the issue persists much longer. The bigger they are, the bigger the backlash they could receive if they continued on ignoring the issue right now, they at least have to show some bit of action towards supporting Ukraine. The current thing is Russia is kind of trying to stand with China to create a power to combat the US, and China right now is letting things happen so that Russia has no way but to come to them at the end, which is what they wanted, but with this, it's like they're the dominant power in the relationship.

Then wouldn't the west be forced to forcibly ban every type of safe-haven asset there is? Plus, even if they did try to do this, as I said in another post of mine, they're trying to preserve their individual wealth, in the overall scheme of things, Bitcoin adoption would not save the economy of Russia with all the sanctions placed on them. In the end the damage implemented by the sanctions will stay and will be felt by the country, whether adoption happens or not imo.

And even if they did, I don't think the west would ban crypto. It's a move that basically does nothing, might as well just strictly regulate Russia instead.

I reckon it wouldn't be bad? I mean if he didn't know jack about managing the team, pretty sure he can spend money to hire someone who does know. He's a businessman, he can probably adapt to whatever he sees as an opportunity, whether he knows jack about it or not. He's probably going to set his sights on trying to improve the club, though tbf I think anyone who's trying to bid would try to do so, and I don't think there's much difference between those bidders anyway, the team will try, keyword try, to improve.

Assuming the movement of organizations or any related group that transact with crypto as a representative of crypto itself is... kinda dumb? I mean yes, it's open for all, but that's the point, Bitcoin doesn't take any side, it's always available for use whatever you're situation you are in. Those people are simply investors of crypto, they're not really a spokesperson for it, nor is it going to ever have one imo.

It's probably on the good side tbh? I mean it gives more people options, and more options are always the better thing imo. It won't change ofc, it was what it was made for, if it changed well, it wouldn't be Crypto (or Bitcoin rather).

Well ultimately the one to blame would be the person involved themselves, the rest are just third parties with some degree of influence to the party involved, emphasis on the "some". Sure parents can actively involve themselves in educating their kid, but in the end, it would still be the kid themselves who would decide if he would do something or not. As I said in a previous thread before, influence can be long-lasting but at the same time, it could also be not. A person can choose what they  can be influenced on imo.

Well, waiting never fails you imo, if you're in no rush to take profit in then yea, just wait. I'm of the opinion that we'd see steady movements for the next few months, ups and downs there but it wouldn't deviate much from where we are right now. Shorts might profit off of that, but hodlers wouldn't really get anything out of it. Still stand by my current strategy of going for DCA though, hasn't failed me yet and I don't think it ever will.

Accurate doesn't mesh well with speculation imo.