I think one of the most humane solutions to prevent a cancer ridden body from dying is to get the cancer cells to stop behaving abnormally and gradually killing the whole body. Unfortunately, many of the cells still do not believe or understand that they are massively contributing to the death of the body. They continue to replicate, grow and live abnormally.

More like argument for/against having certain light bulbs due to their energy efficiency. The more efficient ones produce thesame (or more) luminosity as the less energy efficient light bulbs which use more energy, produce more heat and are probably more expensive. Those in favor of the latter would say somewhat reasonable things like "afterall we power the light bulbs with clean energy and our light bulbs are more energy-efficient than older light bulbs used in cities".
I think both make good points though. The former (energy efficient ones) could be doing things wrongly as well if they depend on "dirty/unsustainable energy" for powering their more efficient light bulbs whereas the latter depends entirely on clean energy to power their less efficient bulbs.
By the way, lots of the renewable/clean energy could be put into other important uses if you could reduce the energy usage of the less efficient bulb.

Banks "resisting" means they would also no longer accept cash/physical-fiat currencies? I imagine that people will keep circulating the physical currencies until they gradually fade away and disappear. But I doubt all human beings in the world will stop using physical things they find appropriate as currencies

Our LORD JESUS says "HE who have no sin should cast the first stone"
Well, I would rather focus on helping those who believe what they are doing is wrong, to defeat the urges and setting them free. And I wouldn't allow people to promote it, just as I would not allow anyone to promote fornication, adultery, drunkenness, abortion, corruption etc.
Whatever immorality that'd be done in secret is between us and our GOD.

I used to have an unhealthy urges/desires that GOD helped me to defeat. I would never have defeated them without HIM.  I don't believe even the best psychologist would have helped me defeat the desires when I was living in sin. So, only GOD does it well and permanently.

Interested to know what wrong information they have on their "provable fair statement" that Op is  talking about. I was digesting the post while reading through it until I saw:



Well, I think he/she has to be sure they really did something wrong. And I'd probably just allow them to compansate if wrong was not deliberate. If the betting site statement & provable fair feature is proven to be wrong/contradictory (unintentionally), owners should compensate (assuming it's owned by good person/people), or they would give you reasonable time to fully compensate.

So what's the latest on this issue? Solved?

First of all, it is immoral to legalize humans getting live animals (chickens/cock in this case) to fight... I guess that is what Cock Fighting means in the country, yes or no?

Second, if the health safety measure rule is good, it's certainly a crime to break it and worse is breaking a good rule while taking big financial risk (gambling) on immoral "game/competition".

So, the bettors clearly did what is bad/immoral, which is betting on real animals (assuming they really did that).    Another important thing is to know if they took health risks with that activity.
No one should be encouraging animals to fight nor betting on such fights. And it's also not a good idea to gamble.
There are numerous safe ways to bet on good and safe games/sports.


I would have to know what kind of Quarantine rule was implemented before passing my full judgment. By the way, the government should discourage cock fighting.

If you mean football betting (which is actually part of sports-betting), then I don't really see the need for the typical provable fair feature used mostly for random-based bettings whose betting outcomes are determined by the system you are betting on... And you'll have to worry about the possibility of results of winners getting changed.

Normally you are issued a ticket after betting on sports/football as proof, which makes your true result getting changed by the betting sites hard...Though it's possible that betting sites would wrongly dispute the tickets of true winners  and refusing to accept that they are the true winners when they come to claim their prize. I guess this is where provable fair could be used to avoid that kind of situation, maybe by hashing the tickets before they are giving to bettors?

Ofcourse, this's part of the problems. It's not as if fiat currencies (esp the physical ones) are not used for bad/immoral/illegal things though. They are most likely used far more for evil... Unfortunately they are not as transparent as Bitcoin to help us (the public) know the truth, which is part of the reasons the public don't know much about what they are used for aside information on "crime tainted fiat currencies" handed to us by people that expect  the public to trust them without having the proper means of verification that has the Bitcoin-level transparency.

Well, I just hope we will have decentralized communities/networks on Bitcoin to help prevent things that are wrong/immoral on whole network and for keeping it safe. If you could develop such decentralized networks/communities, it will really be harder for Bitcoin to be controlled centrally. But if you don't, and the network is seen( and proven) as a place with tolerance for evil, it could be "punished" and conquered.
I think Satoshi suggested the use of reputation to encourage good behavior. Other forms of incentives for encouraging good behaviors should be tried also

I think one of the reasons for this is the lack of understanding of what currency is. Perhaps they don't understand how a mere long string of intangible numbers on the internet can be currency. Maybe if you print it on paper and/or tie it to some "good things" people value, it will make more sense to them.

If you tie, let say, 1 btc/coin (some sort of asset-backable coin/bitcoin) to a small pieces of land, and only the owner of the 1 btc can own/have the full right to the piece of land... Then you ask a newbie who doesn't really see bitcoin as currency to buy the coin and have the full right to the piece of land, I bet this will help make coin make more sense to him/her. This works in similar manner for online-based virtual assets/values. Tokens for example can be created to represent(or be tied to) simple art works or any other kinds of virtual products. This could easily mean that the tokens/currencies have real intrinsic values... because they are tied to things that have good values. Bitcoins paid to workers for example are tied to their good services or hardworks (which are values). So you can correctly say it has intrinsic value if the good quality service can be replicated for more/other consumers. This value represented by numbers are exchanged between people within the economy.     I think this is one of reasons it's very important to have a currency with lots of people who deliver good quality services. And you can incentivize participants to deliver  or create great quality services/products for bitcoins.

If gold is scarce or has limited supply, the price won't be stable globally (even in ancient time) unless there were some sort of "one/united" government that can quickly reach all the ends of the earth.

"Assuming" a pure gold the size of a typical coin is worth $100 while a bag of rice is worth $50... next 10 years the bag of rice is worth $100 while the gold is still at $100 per coin.... Do you think the gold is a good store of value in this case?  Beside, you have to mine/produce more pure gold to maintain the supply @ $100 per coin. It's not sustainable, otherwise what happens to the "scarce" or "limited supply" gold is said to be? A huge and growing population will make the idea of using physical gold as currency(while maintaining a "stable" price) a terrible idea.
There are other disadvantages I didn't even mention.

In my opinion, it's better to use things that are very divisible and sustainable as currencies. If you want to continue to use physical gold and still have it somewhat sustainable, you'll have to let it to keep Increasing in price esp at fast pace.

Interesting. I think live betting sounds better. That would be good for gaining more information about the teams before placing your bet. But I wonder how the sport-betting works... Is it a continuous thing until the end of the match or there are particular time betting centers/sites stop accepting bets? If betting is continuous, why would people still bet before the match? I assume that watching a match before betting will giving bettors (who can analyze things) better advantage?

So, in those 5 countries, it's legal to gamble on betting sites, or it's legal to gamble with your funds on any sites?

What exactly does the laws define as gambling. I think this is one of the easiest ways to know if they understand what they are talking about.

Interesting.
I hardly dwell on rumors and gossip though, especially if there are no proper ways people are held accountable for them.

I normally consider them as mere speculations until proven true.    Just wish people are held accountable for damaging rumors and gossips (and they are aware of the consequences)... that's probably when I will start taking such writeups seriously.

In my opinion, you could understand Satoshi better by consuming most of his writeups, rather than what people who don't know him well enough (or atall) say about him.

Well, the good thing about cryptocurrencies (those based on foundational Bitcoin standards) is that it's possible to use them in "cash" form & avoid being cashless... You can print your coins on physical things like paper and use them like you would use paper currencies. Crypto has the necessary features to allow this unlike the current internet based fiat currencies. And I think crypto can designed to be used safely in cash/printed form.

They are reasonable points.  I do not totally agree with few (esp 3) though.
I guess I would call this "8 advice (or maybe 8 rules) on using Bitcoin safely . But rules (and laws) have to based on good foundational/basic principles.

So, I would consider Law in this context a strong word, and the points/advice have to be good and reasonable to become widely accepted as law. Enough consensus and research is required to make it a law.  Once it becomes a law, it'd pretty hard to change without proper consensus and research/hardwork.

I think the total lockdown was an extreme measure, probably without good research, and the weighing of the advantages/disadvantages.

I'd suggest that the good safety/preventative measures be followed while people are allowed to go to work. I find things like avoiding crowded places, using the face protections/masks, eating healthy, handwashing, outdoor gatherings, etc as sensible preventative/safety measures. But you have to do/apply this things rightly so they don't look meaningless.
Not everyone needs these ^ measures though, but for the sake of those who need them, we could all use or do them.

I forgot to warn, if alcohol, betting, or any particular food cause you addiction, it is wise to avoid them so you don't  abuse or get addicted to them. I believe some are better at controlling themselves (self control) than others.

I think it's a good idea to make something like alcohol  bitter, sour, not-too-tasty  etc, so that many who consume it don't easily get addicted. This also includes bettings and foods.  You should try as much as possible (as producers esp) to remove/reduce things that cause those addiction, and/or  loads the products with lots of beneficial things, so that even when the consumers get addicted to them, they gain lots of goods... and very little to no bad.

Meaning you can be successful playing poker with good money management and strategy? Do you know anyone anywhere that earns consistently from poker by depending on strategy, good money management, skills, etc?
If such people exist, then I don't see much difference between them and those earning sustainably from their businesses. People should aquire the right skills before going into poker, I think.

I believe every thing bad should be avoided/ban. But how do you determine what is truely bad or good?
Bad foods, drunkenness, gambling are not good ofcourse. A responsible government should not allow those.
Good Alcoholic drinks in moderation is good for the body. Betting on good games/competitions in moderation is good. Eating good food in moderation is also good for the body. 
It's about moderation and consumption of only good things

Are your test/research giving you different contradictory results or something?
 I guess I would use a betting site that has been tested by multiple reputable sites/systems for provable fairness. The average result from the multiple sites/systems will probably determine how trustworthy the claim of provable fairness is.