I do not think that is a new currency at all. It would be the equivalent to say that the Euros deposited at a bank are different from the Euros that have in your wallet. In fact these euros are more different than the ones that would be emitted as electronic since the banks are entitled to print their own money by lending more than they have in deposits. The Euro will be the Euro even if it is stored in a different way, there is no need to submit that to the 19 on those grounds. The initiative may however require a certain level of acquiescence from all the countries involved, but IMO not any constitutional changes.

In financial terms, bitcoin is just an alternative asset and is only interesting for companies that want to make bitcoin an investment vehicle. Other than that, these business will probably hold just a small quantity of bitcoin or other just as they hold a certain amount of cash to serve trading purposes. Financially, companies try to minimise the amount of cash they have and tend to buy short term debt to simply keep it for a while.

My take is that bitcoin is not going to get a preferential treatment, at least not immediately.

See, that is exactly the problem of people that have a vague idea of what a proof or what science is.


For example, one case does not make a rule. I insist, you should stress test you theory going to a COVID plant. What could go wrong?

I am happy that there are vaccine passports. I sincerely hope they start asking for those in all public places so I do not have to share the same air in a plane with people who are scared of science because they have only weird ideas of how it works and what it is and think that they are "naturally immune".

You probably have not contracted COVID because you do not have any active social life, which is a shame if there are some nice ladies in their 80´s in the vicinity as you mentioned in another post.

I have heard rumours that certain people, including a president, were treated with monoclonal antibodies, a therapy that is not widely accessible and is extremely expensive. Anyone knows about this?

One of those successful cases of bitcoin hodling was a friend of a friend. They (a couple) took an important risk by investing 60k of a dismissal compensation into bitcoin and making a x100 on it before selling half. I do not know what they did with the rest. Now, these people were not rich, they took an enormous risk compared to their total wealth. They had to really believe on the project and pass though some of bitcoins usual "tests of faith".

For someone with let´s say, a net worth of 1M USD or more plus house, hodling 60k until they became 6M would have been not that much of an stress. Do you think it was easier to benefit economically from bitcoin if you were already a bit up in the ladder?

Simple answer, if you could spend 10 USD in 2011 yes. So it was accessible to everyone, it is just that to be in the loop you would probably needed to have the right interests and perhaps know the right people at the right time. Individuals claiming self sovereignty, cryptohackers, cypherpunks, doctors in math, ... all these got a better chance on jumping on the project early.

The thing is that for someone poor, it would have been very difficult to hodl when it made a x1000 or a x10,000, since that amount would mean a life change for the person.

Would not say secret at all. Most of the lobbies are well know and most of the campaign funds seem to be public. I am not so sure of how strong is foreign intervention in US politics compared to internal intervention. I am not naïve, even though the laws prohibit foreign donations and there is a limit to individual contributions, I am aware that there are ways to circumvent this, however it is also true that the press, the opponents and the whistle blowers are there.

At present, declaring that the USA is moved by foreign interest does look like a conspiracy theory. Some influence, maybe, that is all. Many strange things happen everywhere, it is just that only the ones in USA make the headlines.

On peace... yes that is the point.

Age is one factor, but people of all ages are drawn to fight if they have no knowledge of the consequences... or if they have nothing to loose.

I would not say impressive, but yes, it describes in a few words half a life of learning and observation thank you.

Killing for a few weeks... money wars... too long of a topic, but the last two World Wars lasted years and killed millions.

Re Elites... yes they are young and old both, but certainly naivety is certainly not in their dictionary. Zuckerberg was not naïve, I dare to say that since he was 5.

Is it as strong as the US or more

YES - Trade war and decoupling
NO: continue...

Is is a bit weaker than US?
YES - Try to bring then under our sphere of influence. Set military bases if they are in a strategic location. END.

NO: continue...

Is it much weaker than us?
NO - establish trade deal and keep in check. END

YES: continue...
Do they have oil or other strategic resources?

NO - ignore or make an unbalanced trade deal. END
YES - continue....

Do they have a large population or somehow are difficult to invade:

NO - look for a reason to invade or create it "humans right abuse", "terrorism supporters", "own weapons of mass destruction", "they are a dictatorship". If it is true the better, but not needed. Invade.
YES - continue

Is it easy and cheap to overturn the government?
YES - Send the CIA to support a candidate that will be managed by US.
NO - Blockade.

I would not try to compare it, but if I had to, it would be with other Central-American  countries which have undergone a strong initial intervention from the United States and have eventually moved on to some short of democratic governments or have fallen into disarray. El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama... Mexico to a certain point. Even Chile and Argentina may share some elements. While Cuba continued under the Fidel and the party, these others suffered a pro-US dictatorships until they become short of democracies.

None of these have suffered a blockade. Most of them have suffered the effects of being in the path from where drugs grow to the houses of the citizens of the nation that nowadays takes most of them up their noses.


USA has already figured out that invading largely populated countries with plenty of rainforest jungle, large rivers and mountains is normally a low Rate of Return investment and is frowned upon by most countries since they would never get an UN resolution for that. Instead they supported Guaido, which does cost Venezuelan lives. I am not a fan of either of the Venezuelan so called governments.

Well, the thing about "death by boredom" countries like Saudi Arabia is that is does not really matter if your are Arab, Cristian, Buddhist,... because there are certain rules in the country that apply to all. For example, an unmarried couple of expats from I a company I worked for were told that they could not live together because they were not married. We are talking about people who had been together for more than 10 years. I would not even consider what would have happened if they were gay.

So your personal beliefs do not matter, unless you are an atheist, in which case it matters:
I am no fan of Putin, but when Saudi Arabia asked for permission to build mosques in Russia to cater for the Muslim population, he said it was ok as long as churches could be built in Arabia. Obviously, that ended the conversation.

So it is not about gambling being allowed or not for certain groups, it is that the laws are applied to everyone.

I cannot believe that I am reading this. How is "the wife" the house? Firstly, not all marriages are wife and husband, secondly, not only men can be entrepreneurs and take risk, thirdly, and this is what you really got wrong and may cause a problem in you life: your partner is not your adversary, it is part of your team and the most valuable life resource. It is never about who wins and who does not because the team cannot be happy if one of the members is not happy - which means that everyone has to look after the other or eventually they will either part ways or be unhappy together.

I take it you come from a culture in which women are not treated as equals and you seem to have a resentment on the role you have imposed on yourself. Your loss.

As for the rest of the analysis... most of it shows the general lack of knowledge about crypto that can be expected from a Jr.

One of my neighbours, a million years ago, was obviously addict to the slot machines. He would spend hours spinning in a nearby bar (these machines are allowed in bars in my country of origin) and my take is that he would spend a fortune on it. Once, I passed by and I overheard him saying "I am going to teach this machine who is in charge". It sounded like he was attributing some short of conscience and life to the machine and though he could "beat it". I have observed that many people that gamble are into that type of thinking, that is, it is me against this code and this machine and I can actually break the code and win.

I personally do not play slots, but do you think that is why people like slot machines? Short of breaking their code?

If the guy is bored, it would not have anything to do with a club. Some football player have been know to just stop liking the sport after they made enough millions. I do remember an old case, Romario, that used to play for Real Madrid, and after a few seasons he stopped training at the highest level, kept on playing footvolley with his friend at the beach and was obviously overeating to the point in he could no longer be considered an elite player. Yet that is absolutely normal... they earn so much that they no longer give a s*th about it.

If Messi were one of those player, we would have already known about it.

I know many people bet on boxing matches and I recently saw a post on an "slapping tournament". I was thinking that professional boxing is kind of questionable as a sport discipline and even more so as a gambling event. It is known that many boxers sustain long term effects of repeated micro-trauma and even some have been know to die in the ring. For all boxing fans and for others that may have a view on this, how is this being considered a fully legal activity being supported? And how is betting of people hitting each other being considered as legal and ethical in today´s world?

As users of gambling sites, we have to be careful and do our own research before committing our funds to a site. But no matter how much you dig around there is always a chance of being scammed or at least not being treated right by a service. I just read this article below on the need to have some short of protection or even a self regulation. Would you say that you would play more confidently if you knew that you can potentially have a claim if you think something is not right with the system or the decisions? How would that protection look like for you?

https://sbcnews.co.uk/europe/uk/2021/07/23/richard-hayler-ibas-the-ombudsman-from-abstract-concept-to-a-workable-reality/

Para cantidades de cierta importancia, y se que estoy cometiendo una herejía diciendo esto en el foro, se pueden usar servicios de cryptocustodía. El más conocido es el de Coinbase, pero creo que Prosegur en España y seguro que otros en otros paises te puede ofrecer un certificado de depósito que ya es completamente transferible por los canales legales - herencias, sucesiones, donación, venta...

La fórmula simple y también altamente herética si se menciona aquí, tenerlo en un exchange de confianza, que también es transmisible.

Las alternativas: dos o tres cajas blindadas en bancos separados con las partes de una clave privada y las instrucciones. Dejarlo en manos de un abogado o similar es fiarse mucho si la cantidad es alta. Vamos, que muchos dejarían la abogacía si se topan con 3 millones en bitcoin no?

Y sin embargo aquí estamos nosotros, teniendo nuestros sats bien guardaditos en un ledger físico no? La verdad es que la mayoría de la gente que invierte en esas cosas lo hace sabiendo lo que hay. Es raro, aunque no tanto quizá, el caso de personas que lo metan todo o están tan convencidas de que se jueguen realmente cantidades tochas.

Dicho lo cual... las crypto siguen siendo territorio comanche y lo malo de eso es que van a conseguir que se metan regulaciones tan estrictas que no den lugar a proyectos comunitarios amateur que no tienen los fondos para meterse en el marco de juego legal.


Si, mayormente es eso.

Muchos llegamos aquí, al foro, hace algunos años. Nuestra fe era mínima, no sabíamos mucho de la comunidad, ni de la parte técnica... ni de casi nada. Para muchos de nosotros el bitcoin era una caja de tulipanes holandeses y nuestro objectivo era ver si podíamos sacarle un duro a todo esto.

Confieso, en mi caso, pensé que el bitcoin ya había pasado y que ahora había q apuntarse a las alts. Así lo hice: miné, participé en campañas, traduje "White Papers", participé en el foro,... No fue mal, supongo q incluso razonablemente bien teniendo en cuenta el tiempo invertido.

Mi opinión ha cambiado desde dos años hasta hoy. Ahora soy, por una parte, un hodler - un hodler algo escéptico porque la vida te enseña q hay pocas certezas -  pero un hodler q no suelta un satoshi aunque baje el 50%. Me lo puedo permitir... lo considero mi billete de lotería. O quizá el billete de lotería de los que vienen detrás mío, porque mi vida no cambiará sustancialmente creo.

Sigo haciendo campañas como se puede ver, aunque ahora es sólo con pagos en bitcoin. Nada de proyectos extraños liderados por equipos de adolescentes q viven en casa de sus padres y a los cuales no les prestaría dinero ni su abuelita.  También soy ahora un jornalero del bitcoin y pago con posts el billete de lotería de los que vendrán después de mi.

Se que hay muchos miembros nuevos que tienen que hacer este camino y yo soy el primero que cuando me hablaron del buy and hold pensé que era una comedura de tarro para gente que no tenía nada q aportar. No fue así, pero se que cada uno tiene que llegar a sus propias conclusiones y cometer sus propios errores.

Mis disculpas por el tocho.

Certainly, gambling has to be for fun, once you start setting out objectives or believing in mystical vibes or the karma aligning with you (even if that is actually a real thing, who knows) you may be overstretching yourself and putting yourself in situations you may regret. Much better to have a gambling budget and be disciplined enough to keep it that way. It should not be more than 5 or 10% of your income and no more than 20% - 25% of your disposable income. Above that, you are risking excessive gambling.

Aslo, it is much better if it forms part of a social activity with other people, rather than just spinning on your own.