1. Warren Buffett doesn't understand technology
2. Donald Trump clearly said that Bitcoin is a risk to the USD
3. A lot of rich people(or people in general that aren't poor) think Bitcoin is unnecessary because they're privileged. They think Bitcoin is unnecessary because they're and their country is doing fine (at least as of now); completely ignoring other people living in communist and far more corrupt countries.
I feel a little bit of jealousy and envy comes into play with Warren Buffett. He derides stocks that he doesn't care to learn about and seems to be content being stuck in a timewarp. It is one thing to specialize in a certain area and he has done very well by sticking with his array of large companies for Berkshire Hathaway, but it is a bit sad to hear him and Charlie Munger deride stuff they don't understand. Bitcoin and cryptocurrency more generally is going to heavily impact Visa and American express - two companies that they have a large stake in, so there may be an ulterior motive to them talking badly about Bitcoin. They don't like that another technology could potentially undermine two of the biggest financial companies that they have a large stake in. |
|
|
|
I see a lot of threads here about some countries imposing a tax on gambling casinos. And each forum member has their own opinion about this type of topic.
Now I'm wondering, does implementing a tax on a gambling platform will really help a country?
- What are the pros and cons of it?
- What should be the proper tax percentage for you that they should impose.
- Will this be a bad thing for gamblers?
Also, are these governments capable of taxing online gambling casinos that we often use like stake, chips, etc...
- Certain countries do not tax winnings, I think this is a fair approach - tax the company running the show and making the the vast majority of the profits, do not tax the winner who may have stacked up many losses up to that point. Every country needs taxes to keep government and services running for the benefit of everyone, I don't see why gambling institutions should get any special treatment and they can actually be detrimental to society (creating addicts) so may be required to pay a premium for the extra burdens they create compared to say a company running nursing homes. - Maybe 5-10% over the standard company tax rate, as previously described they are a bit of a negative drain on society - doing more damage than providing positive benefits. - Casinos and bookmakers are money making machines, people are generally rubbish at properly determining odds but their ego thinks otherwise. Casinos with their fixed payouts and bookmakers with decades with of historical scores to go on will almost always have an advantage over normal players. |
|
|
|
20%? Is this even real ? Most of the companies not related to gambling pay lower than 10% but not the same in Kenya when it comes to the sports gambling. Now the biggest football clubs have joined hands to oppose this rule. In a bid to raise cash for the financial year amid the struggles caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, Treasury Cabinet Secretary Ukur Yattani has reintroduced the tax, which was removed by President Uhuru Kenyatta in July last year.
“Excise duty on betting at 20% of the amount will be wagered,” said Yattani, which would mean that the amount would be levied and passed on to a person who has won on a bet, which according to Yattani would also help discourage betting in the country.
But AFC Leopards chairman Dan Shikanda and Gor Mahia chairman Ambrose Rachier argue that the tax will negatively affect betting companies supporting local teams and lead to the withdrawal of their much-needed sponsorship.
Both Shikanda and Rachier explained that betting firms have consistently supported football in the country, cumulatively delivering Sh1.6bn (US$14.8m) from 2016 to 2020, and therefore should not be punished through stricter tax measures.
In the statement, Shikanda and Rachier said the return of the tax would cause current league sponsors BetKing to withdraw their sponsorship, explaining that the excise tax was one of the reasons why SportPesa left the Kenyan market in 2018.
“The enactment of the 20% excise tax will unequivocally rule out continued sponsorship of football clubs across all tiers (National Super League, Division 1 and County Leagues), with the net effect of rendering the operations of most of the league teams unsustainable,” the joint statement read. Now this is not just : Unsustainable and unreasonable but according to them "ill timed", their whole sponsorships will be effected. This high taxation will also cause gamblers sore. During pandemic the gambling is a huge income source for them and the government alike. Therefore I do believe that either they should have done it slowly or done it after the pandemic. They are now asking the government to reconsider it. {This is exactly the kind of news we need because this shows how the democratic countries can move forth and oppose such things, not always the tax is legit if served by the government during such times} What do you think ? The funny part is the average person thinking that these people are in any way helping society. The world would be a much better place if every country around the world had identical tax laws and the millionaire/billionaire owners behind the biggest companies in the world were not able to hire teams of lawyers and accountants to figure out every loophole imaginable. Society loses every time these jackals and hyenas are able to burrow away ever more of their gains, inequality keeps on growing and democracies become ever weaker in the face of walls of money. Tax most definitely should be fair and capitalism is a good thing, but it needs strong regulations and politicians who can out-think the lobbyists sent to corrupt them against the public good. |
|
|
|
At present, the market value of Bitcoin has returned to more than 46%, which is a sign that the margin ratio has decreased, the bubble has burst, and the market is accumulating power.
And I think we are currently in a century-long bull market in Bitcoin. In the short term, we are in a technical bear market after a major correction.
I think that meeting two conditions can determine that Bitcoin is in a bear market. 1. The price of Bitcoin must fall by about 80%, and the high point created by the bull market cannot be broken before the next cycle. 2. The lowest price in a bear market should not be lower than the highest price in the previous bull market.
You have to wonder what the end purpose of Bitcoin will be and whether it will sustain through time. Gold has been a store of value for centuries now because it allows physical storage. It can be stolen, but it can also be guarded and hidden. Bitcoin has a bit of a weakness in that area - computers are hacked all the time, exchanges vanish and hard drives containing wallets can fail. All of these things will contribute to an ever diminishing pile of available Bitcoin, so it actually becomes less functional for its original purpose over time (as a form of currency). The super rich people finding it a convenient tool to send money over borders might become more isolated as regular low-level buyers diminish and anonymity fades - by which time they might start moving on to more liquid substitute cryptocurrencies. I think cryptocurrencies will survive and Bitcoin will always be the original, but it might not reach much higher in value. |
|
|
|
While I do agree with some points that you raised, I do think that the Martingale system works for some people but its main purpose is not for profit, but for the realization of a quick recovery from losses.
Realistically speaking, the Martingale system requires a huge amount of capital in order to at least work because it will definitely eat a chunk of your money due to its exponential growth bet per bet. However, what separates this system from other systems is that the recovery that you made after a losing streak can be gained after a single bet. Some people use this system as a 'hail mary' kind of shot where this will be their last resort.
What is betting for if not to make a profit? It certainly isn't the pleasure of losing and it seems a bit naive to claim otherwise. Only a gambler who has lost control of all sense and reason (or maybe never had it in the first place) would see chasing losses with ever increasing amounts as a viable strategy. Due to the very nature of gambling you could easily string together many losses, but it becomes increasingly more unlikely that you will be able to keep doubling your bet before you reach an eventual win. Just like in stock market terms when discussing short selling or other leveraged contracts - "the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent" is pretty much an identical case. There are also limits on the size of the bet that a casino/bookmaker would be willing to accept which would cripple the whole thing at the top level of play. What if you lose a $1 million bet and the house won't accept a $2 million bet for any number of reasons? |
|
|
|
besides I think all outcomes have a probable chance of coming through?
That's the very nature of statistics and analysis. If you flip a coin a hundred times, it might land 55 times on heads and 45 times on tails. However if the coin has no other flaws and is equally weighted on bother sides then the sensible person would understand the most likely result for the next 100 flips is a 50/50 outcome split between both options. The most dangerous (to their own wealth) type of gambler is one who doesn't do any research, because while they may win one great bet against the odds, the bookmaker/casino knows that they will return to make many losing bets. Another dangerous habit is getting the mindset that past bets are in any way linked to future bets, they are entirely independent - just because you lost by choosing black 5 times on a roulette table, doesn't increase the odds of a certain color coming out on the next go. |
|
|
|
He said, Money is still money, but the technology for transferring it is improving.
It makes sense.
Because metal coins were used in ancient times. Then over time it turned into paper. We are currently living in the digital world. Now with the advancement of software technology, people no longer have to keep money in their pockets. It has reached a stage where billions of dollars can be kept in a single account through software alone.It is a security dependent and does not require losing money or any information.
Its name is Cryptocurrencies. It will be called the present and the future.
Thanks to all the Bitcointalk members whose discussions have made cryptocurrency so advanced today.
It's funny really because if all the conversation around energy consumption is true then it's actually a step backwards. He is actually a terrible hypocrite really, because anyone who has used Binance recently will know that the fees to move currency out of their wallets are extortionate - fixed price and not updated for months after the value has moved massively. I remember paying something like $27 to move out around $100 worth of Bitcoin. Visa/Mastercard/American Express are actually miles ahead with lower fees, the only "downside" is they cannot be used anonymously because their is always a paper trail back to the source (required to prevent money laundering). |
|
|
|
So my wife and I started buying bitcoin a couple of months ago, and as of right now we're the proud owners of 0.4 of a bitcoin.
Since everything is so cheap right now, I want to invest some more of our savings before things pick up again.
Should we just be focusing on BTC, or would we be better off diversifying (maybe Etherium?).
We got into crypto in order to help us own a house and be able to be semi-retired within the next 10 years, if that helps.
Quite simply what you're doing with your money is very dangerous. A wise investor would only be placing 5-10% of all their assets into crypto, as it is extremely volatile and relies on selling to someone else at a higher price. We've already seen in the last month the price has lost over 50% of it's value with some claiming that it could drop even further in future. At only 11~ years old it is very untested compared to other assets like commodities and stocks. If you pick the right stocks you can even earn a dividend, so you get back a chunk of your money each year if the company decides to pay out a portion of their profits instead of re-investing. Keep about the same amount in ready cash as well, which might get slightly eroded by deflation but have a plan to use it again when the market crashes in your favorite asset. |
|
|
|
I see that this thread has nothing to do with the list you made, because as far as I know there doesn't seem to be any betting exchange that makes the strongest men's competition a gamble, let alone a crypto-based betting exchange, but even so I really appreciate the topic you created, because that way at least I can find out other types of competitions that are not as famous as common sports like boxing, football and so on, and to be honest I don't know much about the strongest men's matches on this topic, and if I may know how the matches are, is this an official competition?
It seems like the sort of competition that is difficult to rig with so many competitors compared to some of the random and obscure sports that have been mentioned here. There is a large following in my country and it receives prime TV schedule space. I guess the difficulty that most sportbooks face is being able to get live information if they want to take in-play bets, however they don't need in-play bets if they only allow it up to the start of the event. There does seem like prime territory for a bitcoin bookmaker to step in - someone has to step up to take bets on these very entertaining and hardcore athletes. |
|
|
|
Never blamed the site? He created this thread with that particular intention which is why you are completely wrong about that. He is blaming the site for his personal problems which is downright silly.
You seem to have difficulty making a rather basic distinction. This person is not blaming this site FOR their addiction, he is blaming this site for not helping him to control his addiction. You seem like the sort of person who would sell somebody a gun if they told you they were going to commit suicide. It is trivially easy to stop someone hurting themselves, but you support endless greed over all else. This whole self-exclusion stuff isn't a necessity and is simply an extra feature that casinos may/may not choose to provide. Ultimately, it comes down to the gambler regarding whether he/she can control their gambling addiction.
I never said it was a necessity, however it is present in many countries that approach gambling with care and understand that people can take it to a harmful excess. This sort of function is added by pretty much every fiat currency casino in my country, not because it is explicitly required by law, but because the gambling industry should want to project a healthy image and this protects people who have lost control. I hope you never spiral into the misery caused by addiction, because you don't seem to have a clue how it can affect people. |
|
|
|
What More Should Satoshi Do?
Satoshi laid the foundation of Blockchain Database.
He went further to solving the problem of Double Spending in Digital Currency.
Then, he created a Bitcoin for all.
He did not end there, he removed the key to the currency from the hands of the powerful leaders of the world. Then, duplicated the key and handed over each spare to everyone.
Now, our fate in our hands to decide what to do with it.
Tell me, what more should Satoshi do???
I think Satoshi laid the groundwork but they have disappeared for whatever reason. They seem to have made an almost perfect form of digital currency - a sort of pioneering breakthrough like the telephone, the internet or inventions on that scale. It is time for the rest of the world to build on that and keep it as a currency rather than an asset to be hoarded forever. Maybe a max cap of 21 million was too low and it could have been a bit higher, like Dogecoin that originally had 128 billion in circulation. One thing that might be required by any future cryptocurrency to prevent the eventual quantum-cracking attacks in future decades would be 2-factor authentication. Some way to have a secondary unknown and unconnected device/method that can receive a verification code in order to unlock a wallet. If it had an increasing time delay for every failed attempt and possibly warning to the owner it could prevent lots of hypothetical hacks. |
|
|
|
China's crackdown on cryptocurrency (crypto) trading is getting worse. This week, authorities in China's northwestern Qinghai province and a district in Xinjiang ordered cryptocurrency mining projects to close. According to Reuters, the Qinghai office of China's Ministry of Industry and Information Technology ordered a ban on new cryptomining projects and ordered existing ones to be closed in the province by Wednesday (9/6/2021) if this continues to see if prices will weaken again. ...
It's clear that a CCP official in that region wanted to prove themselves to the party and taking down a bitcoin operation to get in Dear Leader's good books is a way to make a name for themselves. It is clear that the Chinese government sees bitcoin as starting to smear their image on the global stage and draw in a lot of local money which they won't be able to control. It allows CCP officials and Chinese business owners to circumvent government wealth controls. Most people who make big money in China want to get as much of it away from the country as possible, because the CCP rules through fear and oppression with little logic at times. Plus instead of cracking down on polluting miners using dirty fuels, they just outright decided to ban in instead - the lazy route out as is typical. |
|
|
|
I personally do not think it's the sites fault that you have a problem. When someone self excludes themselves the site should honor that and keep them excluded, but users will figure out a way to gamble regardless.
You know you have a problem, seek help instead of finding a way to play and being happy if you win, but complaining hoping they refund you if you lose. Society is full of window lickers these days and you seem to be one. Take responsibility for your actions instead of trying to tarnish a site for your faults.
Wow, that is incredibly harsh and unnecessary. This person never once blamed the site for their gambling problem. Most sites around the world now offer this functionality to self-exclude and there should be absolutely no shame in expecting it to work correctly. I've used such functionality myself in the past, to stop myself getting sucked back into these sites out of boredom. It is an extremely simple system to setup and impose, any responsible casino should allow it if they have any conscious or goodwill towards their players at all. The mere fact that they have to be contacted via email instead of using a straight forward "click to exclude me" service shows that they are utterly irresponsible and putting up barriers to prevent people from gambling. Shame on you, an absolutely disgusting attitude against someone who simply wants to improve themself. I only hope that governments get more strict and legally block such manipulative sites in future, they are the worst type of casinos. |
|
|
|
The gambling industry is one of the most exploited in most nations today. I say this as someone from a developing nation that has watched the way the gambling industry grew quite rapidly with every street having one or two and more and more brands keep popping up by the months. Gambling isn't exactly a bad thing when regulated. Regulated gambling is the reason why a lot of persons are living today. Not because it actually gives them the funds to go by every passing day, no, not at all. In fact, it takes from them but the point is, it eliminates bais. It removes from gamblers any reason for doubt on how fair or credible the gambling process have been and that is a + for regulated gambling. Again, it is being taxed by the government and as one of the most patronised, its also doing great in aiding the nation's economy.
For the government the tax income from gambling is higher than the economic cost of gambling it causes through addictions. So as long as the government needs money (which is always the case) some form of gambling will be around. Regulated gambling is better for the customer because we know we won't get scammed. We shouldn't forget that gambling gives hope to many people to become rich one day. Without things like a casino or the lottery many of us had no chance of ever becoming rich. What are 30 bucks each month if you have the chance to become a millionaire? I don't think you'll find many casinos making millionaires, even lotteries with their astronomical odds keep trying to make it harder for people to win by changing the game each year (in my country at least). If you do want to gamble and not waste much time, lottery is the way to go. Getting back to the point at hand - Gambling should be legal in every country with an open society, because just like the failed "war on drugs" it will be done either way. The government should raise money from legal play and use that for education/rehabilitation of the perils. People who commit illegal acts like stealing to fund their addiction should not be treated leniently because of the external harm they do. There are far too many cases where thieving gamblers are treated with pity but they have done much more harm than simply affecting themselves. |
|
|
|
Some wealthy people have expressed their disdain towards Bitcoin. They believe Bitcoin is a scam or Ponzi scheme backed by nothing. Figures like Warren Buffet, and even Donald Trump himself believe Bitcoin is a sham. I'm surprised to see this, since Bitcoin brings many profit opportunities to its "hodlers". For some reason, millionaires (or billionaires) hate Bitcoin. They usually support Gold and Fiat, not wanting to try something new like crypto/Blockchain tech. Justin Sun tried to convince Warren Buffet to get into crypto a while ago, only to find that his efforts were in vain. Thoughts?  I think there are many reasons that they decide to talk badly about it. Some like Warren Buffett send mixed messages - throughout his whole investing career he has repeatedly stayed clear of technology stocks and has admitted that he should have invested in many companies in that sector. He might want to help people avoid losing their money in a highly volatile asset like Bitcoin which comes from a good place, but it's hard to judge the opinion of a self proclaimed technophobe. Trump is another story entirely and will bend whichever way the wind blows if he thought he could use it to his advantage, if there was money to be made in Bitcoin by easy manipulation which would not interfere with his new found political ambition then he would certainly take that path. |
|
|
|
If someone wants to gamble with their bitcoins, tell them to sell it and then gamble with the cash. You cannot stop people who want to spend their bitcoins for gambling and tell it that they should've sold it instead. If the choice as they want to gamble is bitcoin then it should be made by them in bitcoin and they're comfortable using it. Although some may say that it shouldn't be bitcoin that they must use because there are other options for cryptocurrencies to be used for gambling. But that's it, the higher the price, the lesser bitcoin that can be used. Anyway the price of bitcoin has decreased a lot and one can choose to gamble with other altcoins that they prefer.
This is true. The volatility we've seen since this thread was originally posted is a prime example why Bitcoin should not really be used for gambling unless you happen to think it will go up from the current price. There are many reasons, like if you're buying Bitcoin purely for this purpose your "money" value has dropped in half since February. Alternatively you would have been better off cashing out if you had funded a casino account in the huge run up to $65k, it probably would have given you a much better return on your assets - if not the same level of fun. Fiat money which is relatively stable is a much better way to gamble because you don't have to make a layer of secondary valuation calculations due to daily swings in price. |
|
|
|
Does anyone know a crypto-gambling site that offers a game called Chinese Poker? This is not your typical and usual Poker game. More information here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_pokerWant to test my skills in a gambling site, with an actual money on risk, as I only played with no-risk on some poker game apps. - The site should be paying even it's not popular. - Players are verified to be real and we are sure weren't against a robot. Unfortunately I don't know of any sites offering this. It's interesting to learn about new games but it seems that this is not very popular outside of China, with no large tournaments played (according to wikipedia) since 1995/1996. It seems like a very dumbed down version of poker and I'm not sure whether it would be very entertaining. One of the hardest parts for new players in poker is learning the ordering of winning hands and you still have to do that for this version, but then a lot of the fun is sapped out of it by removing the stages and bluffing element. It should probably get a name rebranding because it seems to share little in common with the skilled version of the game and heavily relies on luck. |
|
|
|
In the past, people farmed and exchanged the surplus grain harvested in autumn for rare, unchanging gold. Then give the gold to a trusted person in exchange for his IOU. When you finish eating your own grain, you can exchange the IOU for gold and then exchange for grain.
Now and in the future, we will replace the surplus production with a rare, trustworthy and unchangeable Bitcoin, and it can be quickly exchanged for the product we want in any corner of the world. We no longer have to work hard to carry these gold and IOUs.
In fact, in a few years, I often imagined how to send money conveniently on the Internet. After thinking of Bitcoin, I found that Bitcoin, which has solved scarcity, trust and immutability, is money itself, and it is digital gold that is easy to use.
It might be worth noting that only the very richest people would have owned much gold. If you read "The Richest Man in Babylon" you will see that they generally had tokens in the form of silver or bronze, much like the smaller denominations that you find in several countries today. If you were to apply that to the cryptocurrency world then maybe you should consider "Bitcoin" as the gold, popular altcoins like Ethereum & Dogecoin as the silver and less well known ones as the bronze. It is worth having a mixture because, unlike a fixed precious metal in the real world, we never know if the gold will eventually turn into almost worthless coal and have some silver transform to take its place. |
|
|
|
Would you be able to decide which fight could be risk free that you will bet your weekly pay despite the small odd like 1.50 or would you still rethink if there is an upset like Weili Zhang and Rose Namajunas. How about Jairzinho Rozenstruik vs Augusto Sakai, is this a risk free fight to you?  Jairzinho Rozenstruik by the way is the one that did the nasty cuts to Allistair's mouth. It's funny that you consider a bet at 1.5 to be "risk free", however I have personally encountered several bets (in-play) at around the 1.05 to 1.01 offered by the bookmaker go against me. I don't think any sensible person should be betting a weeks pay unless they have a substantial safety net and savings that make it insignificant. You must at all times remember that you are at a information disadvantage against sportbooks because they have a long history to analyze, lots of technology to "crunch the numbers" and can fine tune their odds fairly quickly as new data becomes available (aka the golden player gets ill). You can build tools that are able to crowd source and look for weaknesses in calculated odds, but that requires substantial investment in various forms. |
|
|
|
There will be no end to discussing this because the answer will be the same, professional help, family, closest / loved ones and also other people.
what they talk about is never really experienced, and all the advice given is good and helpful for gambling addicts.
basically all return to addicts must really want to heal and earnest intentions, and in that way using any means will definitely be useful and successful.
and everything that is suggested plays a role in curing a gambling addict depending on how and is taken seriously to help him.
I think all of the things you list at the beginning are only useful one the individual themselves has decided the gambling is a wasteful act to be avoided if they seek long term prosperity. There are very few professional gamblers out there, it is mainly reserved for the highest quality poker players or others who have mastered a niche such as sports betting. However the chances that the average person has the right skillset is the same as the amount of lottery winners out there - millions to one. Once people are educated to understand that the math is simply against them at all times, that has to be the point that they either see the futility and stop, or alternatively go down a deep rabbit hole of lying to themselves. I fear people in the second category have a much tougher and sometimes impossible road to recovery. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
