We know that day trading or short time trading is like playing with wild fire, not may can handle it. That's y most player's end up in loss and very few are successful day traders.
Is that hold true for gambling also?
There are posts here that gambling is addiction and how to get rid of.
Are there gamblers here who are in profit overall?
Gambling is really addicted and so is day trading both are risky but still many do it for profit fun, and experience and it's on your motivation and how high is your risk to continue moving on in gambling and day trading but when it comes to what is more addictive, I guess gambling is more addictive, obviously because of the so many online casinos and casinos, it's probably the most profitable industry because gamblers will always come back no matter what is the condition. I think gambling is not like a day trading because there are many traders who are doing trading on daily basis and they gain a lot of profit so in day trading if you have more skills and more knowledge then you can easily make a lot of profit, otherwise day trading is also risky but when you face high risk then its return will be also high. But if traders don't have skills and knowledge, that will be the same as gambling because they want to make a profit without analyzing the market. We know that is happening to many traders out there but they still not learning about trading. But if in sports betting, if that person has skills and knowledge to analyze which team that has a big chance to win, his probability of winning will increase. I agree. Trading with big amount or what you can't afford to lose without the required knowledge/experience is basically gambling. Same as other bettings, like betting in skill-based games, sport betting, poker, politics, etc. I believe a good poker player for example could win consistently with his/her skills. The good and successful ones are probably few |
|
|
|
|
Probably the higher winning percentages... assuming they are cheaper(very unlikely), fool-proof and verifiable. But I guess those with higher percentages will be costlier than the lower ones... The low price alone of those with low winning % could attract more people if they are not aware of the low chances of winning.
|
|
|
|
|
I think similar games mixed with betting already exists in Crypto world. I have seen couple of posts here on the forum promoting them. I am not sure if i have come across the violent ones or I probably don't remember due to my lack of interest in them. I am more interested in those I can apply in real life, like competition on farming, city construction, cryptocurrency trading, safe survival games etc.
I honestly don't want to waste alot of time playing and betting on games that won't benefit me in real life. If I fail to win a bet, the information/knowledge acquired from the game will still be very useful for me in real life. I prefer not to gamble with my money and time... Only safe and responsible betting!
|
|
|
|
Yes, that is a major issue but the chance of $10 becoming $20 is also high. Considering the price of Bitcoin from 2010 till date it has always gone up.
For example let's look into the price of Bitcoin on Bitcoin pizza day
2010: $0.0041
2011: $6.47
2012: $5.07
2013: $120.96
2014: $508.41
2015: $238.17
2016: $445.23
2017: $2,136.02
2018: $8,465.99
2019: $7,623.51
2020: $9,205.40
So, if a vendor accepts Bitcoin he/she will benefit and not incurr any loss.
This is a really bad of thinking about it, business owners aren't long-term investors, they are mostly focused on short term. Just look how covid-19 impacted small business, so many of them were forced to close because they can't afford a month or two of rent when they have no income. The same can easily happen with Bitcoin - imagine a business that mostly accepts Bitcoin and doesn't convert it, and one month Bitcoin crashes by 50% - now they are at a loss and will have to take loans or get closed, but it's still a risk because there's no guarantee that Bitcoin won't fall further. If a shop wants to accept BTC, they need to be smart about it, have a solid strategy for converting to fiat, prepare for it legally, maintain proper security, etc. No one will need to convert to fiat with the right Bitcoin ecosystem. If we have multiple stablecoins backed by national currencies on Bitcoin network, people could accept Bitcoin or their "national stablecoins". I think I would prefer to aThe ccept Bitcoin and automate it to convert, maybe 50—70% to stablecoin whenever I receive payments. I wouldn't trust leaving all my funds in fiat currencies long-term |
|
|
|
|
I actually don't rely too much (or even atall) on trading indicators. I just look at the charts and consider the fundamentals before trading.
It's as simple as buying low and sell high for profit. Or buying dips and selling highs.
I think it's better to just develop strategies that work for you and stick to them.
|
|
|
|
|
Fiat goes up and down too if put it side by side with something more stable.
If you could make the price of Bitcoin/crypto fluctuate moderately and consistently without losing its deflationary property, it could compete very well with fiat in that area.
|
|
|
|
Ok, so you're into an auction having a trustless system. I guess almost everything can be applied this technology, you know what I'm saying when bitcoin was borned. A lot of ideas came out and mimicked the idea that it brought to us.
As for the example you have saying about minted coins, I think the correct word should be newly mined coins.
The word "mint" in that context is still OK in my opinion. I understand why some would prefer the word to the other. It conveys the actual meaning (production of new/fresh coin) more. Mining is more suitable for Bitcoin-like Proof of Work while the other sounds better for the PoS |
|
|
|
What's the need for a token burn after tokens has been minted? Why not decide on token metrics before minting tokens. Token burn does not make a project more profitable as we all think less token does not equal utility. No utility means no value.
Good point. If no one is using the token the burning will really have no positive impact on the price. The token will have to be very unique and very useful to attract real demands, and for the price to increase. By the way, i would prefer a mechanism for locking up tokens (with fixed supply) via consensus, than burning... especially for auto regulating the price of the token in decentralized manner. |
|
|
|
|
Run casino on Blockchain? I wonder what Blockchain/cryptocurrency is that: EOS, Ethereum, etc?
Guess one of the reasons one would consider this is to have a native coin for his casino, (or have some parts of the casino data decentralized) and not really for proper decentralization or something like that.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting. Have you seen this happen before (maybe with proof) or you just think it could happen? I guess escrow system could prevent this sort of thing from happening(if it does really happen).
Anyway, I wonder why miners would reject similar transactions from a seller as double spending if they confirmed that the seller is spending the amount he/she actually owns.
|
|
|
|
|
Ofcourse, casino environment is part of what encourages people to gamble with their money and time. To make matter worse lots of casinos encourage players to gamble rather than bet responsibily. I think the law should intervane in this area. It's more like they gain from people's misery, bad choices or problems.
By the way, people shouldn't be spending too much time or money on things that are not profitable or beneficial to them.
|
|
|
|
People doesn't seem to care about it, the exchange that bought CMC happen to have a good reputation in the market, so people would not complain if Binance will be in the top, I believe if they have manipulated the ranking, I think it's not grossly done, I am not seeing the obvious.
There will be a manipulation that will happened on CMC precisely Binance have planned this. Using this site to gain more attraction, CZ is very wise to bought this and I think he can get it back cause the traffic on this site and advertisement is really in demand. Let just hope that even with manipulation on the ranking and listed projects, he still improve and add more features that are useful for users. But youre definitely right, many people loves using Binance so they would not much care if there are inside job happening on CMC. It's more like you are endorsing manipulations... Not suggesting that anyone is manipulating things over there, just think that evil shouldn't be encouraged atall in anyway else you get used to it. Besides, people with conscience would avoid the platform if it's manipulated, no matter how good it appears to be. |
|
|
|
|
I agree.
People could however minimize risk by learning to trade and trading with little amount, or what they can afford to lose until they have mastered the business.
Fear will be reduced if you don't take too much risk with money and you will be more relaxed in the the course of learning.
In the end good traders would be making more and losing less.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, if their opinions/words are really affecting the price of cryptocurrency, it probably means they are honest, consistent, their predictions usually comes to pass, and observant people are aware of this.
There could be the negative side of this though, people who aren't really honest or consistent could be manipulating price to make their predictions right. < That isn't moral and probably not legal.
|
|
|
|
|
What happens when you "throw" dice in both worlds(physical & virtual worlds)? Random numbers are "generated" in the air and computer, right? So that is probably a fair representation of both randomness.
I guess the most important thing is that it has sides, can be "thrown" to generate random numbers,etc
By the way, if it is easy or possible to add 1000 sides to physical dice will that make it less of a dice?
Virtual or cyber world kind of breaks the limit of physical representation of things (or virtual "dice" in this case... which reduces the limits of having only few sides). This is just my opinion, assuming I understand the post correctly.
In regards to the aspect on dice picture, guess it could show a dice with 1000 sides in summary... let say the dice Pic has 1—6 sides, on the 6th side you write "6 to 1000".
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds interesting.
I guess I have seen similar game like this before for mobile phone (more like solving newspaper word puzzle) ...cant remember the name now. and it's likely skill-based game.
Do players take turn to play the game or they compete together at thesame time?
|
|
|
|
Imagine a world where businesses, merchants, and everyday people use crypto as the only medium of exchange. Everything will operate autonomously and decentralized without the need for third parties. In this world, governments and big corporations might cease to exist as everything will be guided by both Blockchain technology and AI. People will be able to gain autonomy over their own money, reducing corruption and fraud in every way possible. Negative events in the mainstream world will have little to no effect on the world's economy, as it lives in cyberspace. No one will be able to control people's actions worldwide, as it'll be a "free for all" scenario. Central banks will no longer be relevant, as people will become their own bank via the use of various interconnected Blockchain networks. While all of this seems to be more of a dream than anything else, there's a possibility it could happen in the future if people lose trust in governments, central banks, and conglomerates alike. What are your thoughts?  I think humans should have major control over the system not AI. Humans should be guiding robots/AI and able to control it via moral rules and other means. Free for all scenario is for lawless things. A well decentralized and safe cryptocurrency won't be a place of lawlessness. It should be governed by us/rules/laws.. . Afterall Bitcoin system is governed by rules, and satoshi whitepaper/posts speaks about Reputation, consensus, rules, escrow, etc. It was never built for lawlessness |
|
|
|
|
Ofcourse, government support of small scale business is important but it shouldn't be done by government alone.
There are couple ways to start a small business without relying on loans/support from government... People could get goods in wholesale or from manufacturers "for free" to sell and return the cost price with some profits to the manufacturers or wholesale owners... and remaining gains become their profits.
You could try apprenticeship. Where I live people who serve as apprentice are usually settled (with their own business or money or both) after few years or so of serving medium/big business owners. It's a cultural thing and still very successful and practiced in this modern time. Lots of people basically avoid government loans and things like that to avoid problems. Family/relations/friends can help you with money by lending, donation, partnership etc
There are lots of other ways to start small scale business without relying on governments
|
|
|
|
|
When I see people attribute the lack of nodes or miners in a particular country, continent or place to poverty, illiteracy etc, I look around me and smh.
I live in a small town with thousands of people, both poor and rich... Very close to me I could count lots of people who can afford to run nodes or own miners if convinced or if they find them really useful.
People often confused poverty with money in bank accounts, appearance, poor living condition(there are lots of rich people who live poorly ) etc... this isn't really the real situation of things. Lots of people don't use bank accounts but they are pretty comfortable and are living humble life. The humble life used to be cultural in many places. You could find people living in poor houses but have lots assets: animals, lands, farms etc that can fetch them lots of money. . Very comfortable people I know could tell you "it's not easy but we are managing" just to feel humble. Or the "uneducated/traditional" rich business men will call poor countrymen: brother/uncle, sister/aunty, sir/daddy or ma/mum, just to be humble or probably to be admired.
The problem with attributing lots of issues to poverty is that you will probably never find a solution. You could come to a deeply cultural "poor" country/continent and still find them the way they were 50years ago except for the unavoidable improvements in technology (which is not wealth).
It's won't be that difficult to get people run the typical full nodes if it's very beneficial to them and if they could easily use that productively or for their businesses.
|
|
|
|
|
Hope miners don't get used to the gains from high fees and forget that low fee and fast transaction is important too.
This problem probably wouldn't have occurred if price has gone up as it should be. Altering or removing any of the basic Bitcoin/Crypto principles (deflation in this case) will certainly have future consequences for the cryptocurrency.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
