Well, a gambling platform that lets moderators choose its winners itself isn't really a gambling platform anymore, it's just a home for scammers to scam people. Honestly, the first thing that came up to me was that the man was using the gambling site as a way to scam people, the site itself wasn't really a scam but rather legit since honestly, people doing the exact same thing have done so for the past years, doing it again seems kinda stupid. Turns out I overestimated their intelligence.

Musk noises are just there for a bit, it shouldn't last long. They'd probably be back once they start selling off the BTC that Tesla and Musk himself has, since afaik they haven't sold theirs yet. After that, well, they can stay in their Dogecoin world. Changes are bound to happen though. As much as people want to ignore what Musk said, some investors are rather reliant on his opinions, and would probably initiate a small dump or so that could affect the market in the next few weeks. Nothing serious imo though, the market has been through worse.

Facts. Yes, the recent dip probably had something to do with musk, but that's it. It just happened, nothing permanent. We're in a volatile market, being surprised by a dip, no matter the reason, seems kind of weird since the moment you entered, it should have been quite obvious what volatile means. Though honestly, it's probably more that they're hating on musk, not about the price dip or anything, but rather the negative idea musk puts out about Bitcoin and the environment.

Well, it is influenced by someone, and not really Bitcoin doing its own thing ngl. Elon has quite an influence on some of the investors in Bitcoin, so him talking bad about it inevitably made them pull out of the market. Still, it wouldn't make that much of a difference in the long term imo, temporary damage so to speak. Not to mention that we're still above the $40k mark. Honestly think that a drop below it would actually signal the bear market instead of this one that was man-made by musk.

It's not really gambling itself imo, but rather an addiction to it. Well in other words, the mental issue associated with addiction, and let's be real, Idk why but gamblers always, ALWAYS have that tag in them. Like every bloody gambler alive in this world always has that tag of addicted to gambling, probably due to the long-term aversion of people and their negative idea towards the prospect of gambling. The negative idea probably stemmed from the fact that you can lose money in gambling. Yes, any other form of activity also makes you lose money, but gambling has that set number that you can lose, and there's technically no limit to it.

Sides, the media doesn't advertise winners probably because they don't want to encourage gambling. Yes, people win, but among the numerous number of people gambling, what percentage actually wins, enough to actually make gambling worth it?

Not sure about this, but probably because Elon was one of the few people who made people invest in Bitcoin. He had introduced crypto to his followers, and they are a lot ngl, and probably some of them went out to invest Bitcoin since Elon was looking into it, just like how it was in Doge the first time. Now that Elon is talking bad about Bitcoin, like it or not, it's a negative influence on newbie investors who pretty much just follow what the trend of social media (aka famous people) go for.

Let him dump his coins. Not like it matters, Bitcoin lived for a decade without him, I'm pretty sure we can last longer than that. Heck I'd actually be glad if left the community for good. That means most of those who entered influenced by him would also stop influencing the market, making us, well, basically free. Not that he was much of a cage ofc, but heck as someone in front of the social media, his influence IS pretty huge whether we like it or not, though that's just solely based on influence.

I mean let's be real here, it's like Elon isn't taking the community seriously, like he sees us as idiots. Just with the reason he used to throw away BTC as payment. I'm not even mad with him stopping BTC payments, heck that comes and goes as far as I'm concerned, nothing new there. But presenting a reason like "hard for the environment"? Heck, giving no reason at all might be the better option. Let him sell it, dump it in the market, at least the market would go back to people who actually know what they're investing in.

It's a nice incentive. The idea itself is honestly brilliant and it just pushes for people to actually have a purpose to vaccinate themselves. After all, against the numerous rumors that the vaccine can't do much or isn't a guarantee, some people still opt to not vaccinate themselves. It'd actually probably be better if they instead split it, some parts being given into multiple people while a bigger sum given to a single person so that it can be spread out much more. After all, one million given to a single person and one million given to multiple people, the latter gives way more advantage especially during these times.

Hmmm, well what age is the child at? Honestly, I would opt to leave them out, like argue with them that you can play your games as long as you eat on time, sleep on time and follow orders (this basically means that you guarantee them free time of playing). I myself always play games, but I've learned to schedule it out all on my own whenever I had deadlines or stuff that I need to do. Let the kid learn by themselves on how to manage their time scheds since the only thing they'd listen to is whatever they themselves plan, not to others.

Also stop talking like gaming is a disease or something. See here, the fact that kids are able to enjoy their time for entertainment this early on simply means that whatever sufferings the early generations had was never passed on, and that's a positive imo. Now, if it's borderline addiction though, things change. Though honestly if its still early on, I'd leave the kid alone with a few rules here and there to follow. Kids are just like that after all, you can never really persuade them with anything persuasive since well, they're kids.

Huh, is the vaccination a guaranteed stamp of safety from the virus? Really weird that the government even allowed this, since some places (like mine) still require even vaccinated people to wear masks. Cause honestly, if the vaccine had a 100% guarantee to poof the virus, then everyone would be going for it, especially those in the workforce.

Going first to a casino after being vaccinated isn't certainly a first on my list of things to do if I do get one. Plus, I don't really mind wearing masks all the time, it only inhibits me from eating on the walk but other than that, no issues really. Looks like the casino is also back at 100% working capacity, good luck to them all then.

You can probably find some samples here
https://github.com/topics/betting

Though I think this one works based on what you're looking for
https://github.com/remorses/auto-bet

Note, I didn't really check the code/program itself, I only read what was written on their repository about the description of the program itself. Test at your own risk. I'm assuming you know a tad bit about coding if you were asking about the bot and how it works, though if not I suggest asking for help from someone that actually knows what the bot does base on the code given.

Good luck.

Nothing surprising. It was always a known fact that when pandemic started, everyone had that hype of a feeling where they're pretty much free to do anything since they had a LOT of free time. Considering that, gambling isn't really a surprising option for some, nor should it be. Died down probably on the period where the fact that you had no job temporarily hit hard, and you had to manage your finance for the time being while taking into consideration the situation back then.
This. Idrk why it wasn't already popular way back then, the qol changes I got when I started doing most transactions online was enormous, unlike when I went to stores and meetups personally to pay.

Definitely close to the bottom from the last 3 months though. I'd reckon we wouldn't go up much from now, only sideways of around $40 to maybe $55k or so. That, or we're going down to below $40 before doing more sideway, though it's unlikely since there are still a lot more other investors waiting to enter the market and I highly doubt they wouldn't enter the market at the sight of an opportunity. Ofc, if the price keeps going down to below even $30k, a dump may be quite apparent.

Might be because the amount you're betting is still small. Most casinos would actively ask for KYC when you go past a certain amount at times, plus, afaik there are also casinos where you can directly buy funds from their site using your card, so that's still technically you giving out your own details to their site. Easily avoidable if you only play small-time, kind of a pain to avoid if you're a big player. There are also instances where you get connected via your names though, but that's mostly just the work of someone stalking you really hard.

Asking a crypto casino kinda defeats the purpose of users actually wanting to use crypto anonymously. It's like putting the cart before the horse kind of thing? But then again, casinos are sometimes required by the government themselves to put out KYC restrictions for the sake of security and legality and whatnot, so I can't really blame them. I'd put the government first before users since they are the ones that allow them to actually continue their business. Still, it might have been better to as you said, use fiat instead of crypto if that was the case. Let other companies that have the capability to get a license give us a crypto KYC-free casino instead of filling up the scene with casinos that have KYC.

Thing is, they looked for those who match fixed cricket matches only to find something way bigger imo. Nothing new about match-fixing, but I think this is rather big for it to have been ignored at that point? I mean, if the broker claims to be able to influence that much amount of tournaments, then the legal team behind the tournament should have done something already, that is unless they're all in it together. Not really that updated on crickets, but was this even investigated properly? After all the article is pretty old.

Seems like a way for private and public institutions to improve their image. Though honestly, giving a number, and a solid one at that, in terms of reputation based on the amount of environmental activity a company/group/organization did seems like a bad thing. Awards are good, they're quite general imo and is a bulk of a number that isn't really set, so it doesn't really give that description that a group is better than the other. Not to mention that it isn't possible to sell it to another group (assuming the carbon coins could).

Probably cause of Elon and Tesla. AS much as most people hate it, Elon has quite an influence in the market (at least, some newbie investors do base their stuff on his opinions), and Tesla is a big corporation. Seeing that they dropped Bitcoin as payment may send negative signals to investors, hence why the sudden drop (although fr, it's not like we forced them or anything). It's also quite stupid how Elon's reasoning for the drop was about the economic reasonings and stuff like that.

Ok, I knew about Tesla announcing the news but didn't know why, kinda disappointed that I know now. Of all the reasons he needed to say, he just had to say about the non-existent issue of Bitcoin miners using up a lot of energy. It'd probably be better if they just said that they wanted to exit the market since they've had enough, I'll take that.

Still, the drop should only be temporary, we all know how Elon affects the market after all, but his hands mostly touch upon DOGE and not Bitcoin. Wait for a few days maybe, and it'd go back up.

Facts right here lmao