petit dip pour débuter le week-end, on passe sous les 45k
10 jours après ce sont les 43k qui sont attaqués et qui sont remis en question. Ca ne s'arrange toujours pas, je pense que si ça continue à stagner mollement à ces niveaux, une attaque de bears pour tenter de faire plonger le cours en-dessous des 40k pourrait arriver. |
|
|
|
Oui c'est pratique si il y a une mouquère qui pédale mais là visiblement ils ont fait une sortie sans moteur  Blague à part, je ne sais pas si le pédalo est considéré comme un sport/loisir interdit aux femmes mais c'est étonnant de ne voir aucune femme parmi eux sur les photos. Ca doit être la marine talibane comme dit elma  |
|
|
|
J'suis pas tout à fait d'accord avec toi, aujourd'hui certaines arnaques paraissent plus "legit" que beaucoup de projets qui le sont. Il y en a tellement que les fair launch aujourd'hui c'est presque devenu du gambling.
Effectivement la frontière entre marketing et arnaque est parfois plus que floue pour les affairistes sans scrupules, malheureusement. Et lorsqu'un investissement est décrit comme sûr alors que c'est du gambling c'est bien une arnaque. Mais tout investissement dans les cryptos est du gambling in fine, donc si pour toi tout investissement risqué est une arnaque, c'est le marché entier des cryptos qui en est une au final. |
|
|
|
We are in the 5th round and PSG is already leading with 4 points, well without counting the lacking game between OM and Nice. Lille = total failure this season. Lyon isn't stable as usual. OM and Nice aren't bad for the moment but for how long? Angers won't stand there after a couple of rounds imo. PSG should create 2 teams, one in the Ligue 1 to keep that league competitive and another team in EPL or La Liga tho I agree with you, Lille is currently encountering a big failure at the beginning of this season. Bookmakers don't even trust in their ability to win against small teams. Lille will meet RC Lens next saturday and they are the underdogs of the match. That's unbelievable. RC Lens @2.55| Draw @3.35| LOSC Lille @2.80 That sort of makes sense. Last season Lille winning the league was not something people expected neither, and they somehow did manage to do that which was awesome but unexpected even last season, check the early game odds for Lille and that wasn't great neither last year, eventually they got better odds. However, if you check the transfers this season, according to transfermarkt the value of the players that left was 74 million euro, whereas the ones that came in had 30, that is 40+ million euro difference in player value compared to last season. That should be a good enough reason to drop in talent and success as well. I am not saying that they will keep on being bad, but I do understand the logic of them not getting the attention they were getting last season. This year it is all about PSG once again and how they built a team that is unbelievable. No you can't say that, this year is not all about Paris Saint-Germain. LOSC Lille is also playing in the Champions League championship in the group G while AS Monaco, Olympique Lyonais, Olympique de Marseille are playing in the Europa League championship and Stade Rennais is playing in the Europa Conference league(they met Tottenham yesterday : 2-2) So it will be a great year for all those french teams. |
|
|
|
Nope. Golf sport is known to be a sport for rich men. I suppose you are one of them, Tiger.
Rich men do what they do I guess as long as they are entertained. Rich men like real estate tycoons or known CEOs of an investment firm are legendary guys, was this supposed to be the game of this kind of rich VIP gamblers?
Some rich men are also former gamblers who have won big prizes at casinos, poker tournaments, national lottery, etc. Those guys are maybe some of them. Gambling addiction doesn't fade away when you win jackpots and big prizes, then if they were gambling addicts before becoming rich they certainly still are. |
|
|
|
|
Ce n'est qu'un juste retour de manivelle, pour rappel en 2015 la France sous le gouvernement Hollande avait unilatéralement décidé d'annuler la livraison de 2 gros navires de guerre à la Russie(Mistral), faisant perdre toute crédibilité à notre fiabilité en matière d'industrie militaire. Alors quand on entend ce pitre de Le Drian(qui était ministre de la défense à l'époque) donner des leçons de morale à l'Australie, on rigole...
|
|
|
|
oula...j'ai pas la même définition du mot "fascisme"...
Le fascisme c'est quand l'Etat légifère dans tous les domaines de la vie. Je cite Wikipedia: "Le fascisme se définit lui-même comme « totalitaire », et peut se résumer par une formule de Mussolini : « Tout dans l'État, rien hors de l'État, rien contre l'État ! »." Avec cette histoire de prénom, on est en plein dedans. Les prénoms sont complètement personnels, l'Etat ne devrait pas avoir son mot à dire. [...] Il ne faut pas être si caricatural, j'imagine qu'il prévoit des exceptions pour Adolf et Benito par exemple, il ne faut pas être plus royaliste que le roi non plus. |
|
|
|
Je t’ai donné la source.
Et de toute façon, même zemmour ne sait pas ce qu’il veut car selon lui « Inès » est un prénom qui sera interdit alors que c’est dans les ptt. (Il a expressément dit que Inès n’est pas un prénom qui devrait être donné en France !).
Bref c’est madame de la fraisange (Inès) qui doit bien avoir les boules.
Zemmour est un démagogue.
Avec de bonnes et de mauvaises idée.
Encore hier on lui posait la question “si vous ne voulais pas votre temps de parole être comptabilisé, vous n’avais qu’à dire que vous n’êtes pas candidat »
Ce s quoi il répond « je dirais que je suis ou ne suis pas candidat quand je l’aurais décidé ».
Je profite de Yom Kippour pour le dire sans être contredit par les spécialistes de la question, mais AFAIK Zemmour est sépharade, ce qui veut dire que ses ancêtres ont été chassés d'Espagne lors de la Reconquista qui a bouté les musulmans et les juifs hors d'Espagne et imposé les lois de limpieza de sangre. Il cherche donc certainement à mettre en oeuvre ce que sa famille a vécu il y a plusieurs siècles. |
|
|
|
What do you mean by you can't win consistently? In pure gambling games, you will mostly win as many times as the theoretical probabilities of the game say it. That is to say, if you have 48% chances of winning, you can easily win almost every other time. On the contrary, at a skilled game, if you are worse than the other players your chances to win will heavily drop.
He already said that he want to rely on his skills rather than luck. Also, as a matter of probabilites, your probabilites of winning in a particular time relies on how much money people are losing to the platform on the same game. So if there is no one losing money at that time, your chances of losing will increase/ If there is a lot of users losing money at that time, your chances of losing will decrease. That's one of the reasons why developers despise online casinos. There is no such thing as luck being involved when you're playing versus the house. One way or another the house will eventually walk away with all of the money if you follow a lifestyle that involves gambling. They can analyze so much information, playing patterns, huge datasets of historical information and will always have a house edge - if for no other reason than to pay for the basics of keeping that gambling company at breakeven, regardless of profit. Someone has to pay for all the licensing, infrastructure updates, support staff and latest flashy games to keep players enticed. At least with option B you have the chance of paying off the house edge while also taking advantage of your skills and intelligence to drain money from other players.
Combine my response below with yours, and poooof, we've just described the majority of online casinos. I actually believe that you can't win consistently if you go with games that are purely based on luck, therefore I would choose B to use my skills and I'm confident I could win against anyone, however, my confidence does not speak that I'm really good in gambling but I would also choose a game that I think I will win. $100 is not much, but if you value that money, you will not waste it on games that will not challenge your skills. Just saying.  What do you mean by you can't win consistently? In pure gambling games, you will mostly win as many times as the theoretical probabilities of the game say it. That is to say, if you have 48% chances of winning, you can easily win almost every other time. On the contrary, at a skilled game, if you are worse than the other players your chances to win will heavily drop. He already said that he want to rely on his skills rather than luck. Also, as a matter of probabilites, your probabilites of winning in a particular time relies on how much money people are losing to the platform on the same game. So if there is no one losing money at that time, your chances of losing will increase/ If there is a lot of users losing money at that time, your chances of losing will decrease. That's one of the reasons why developers despise online casinos. No you're wrong, that's obviously not what Sanitough was talking about. He was just talking about the House Edge that "no one" can beat on the long run according to him. It's not the same thing as what you are claiming here, because you're accusing all casinos and gambling games to be rigged and to cheat their users. That's a bold statement. Do you have proofs about that? Outcomes are usually public in most of casino games, then you would easily find cases of house cheating and being able to expose them if you were right. Moreover could you explain us how platforms manage to cheat their users when the games they are offering are provably fair? |
|
|
|
For the fun of it, i'm gonna bet short on BTC.
Because i suspect many will bet on long, and if by some random chance my side wins, gonna be a nice payout
How do you bet short or bet long here? I don't understand  There is no such thing as "sides" like you say, you can only bet on $2500 price ranges. $45,001 - $47,500, $47,501 - $50,000, $50,001 - $52,500, etc. So please share a screenshot of your bet to show us on which range(s) you've bet on precisely. You could bet on ranges from as low as 5,000$ or less, so I guess this is what btcltcdigger is meaning with going short. I will, as always, be waiting a little bit longer before placing any bet, too much can still happen at this moment (in both directions). If you're right it would be interesting to know how btcltcdigger has allocated his money to avoid finishing at loss if the price doesn't fall under 40k$, and to manage to get a "nice payout" as he claims. Because it represents 12 ranges to cover on the whole (and 12 ranges on the other "side"). |
|
|
|
I actually believe that you can't win consistently if you go with games that are purely based on luck, therefore I would choose B to use my skills and I'm confident I could win against anyone, however, my confidence does not speak that I'm really good in gambling but I would also choose a game that I think I will win. $100 is not much, but if you value that money, you will not waste it on games that will not challenge your skills. Just saying. What do you mean by you can't win consistently? In pure gambling games, you will mostly win as many times as the theoretical probabilities of the game say it. That is to say, if you have 48% chances of winning, you can easily win almost every other time. On the contrary, at a skilled game, if you are worse than the other players your chances to win will heavily drop. Means you'll be profitable in the long run, most gamblers do not focus on luck-based games as there's a house edge, and regardless of the house edge, no one could win consistently due to the word "edge". Look at the casinos, the most profitable games for them are roulette, dice, and other related games that have a house edge, it attracts gamblers because it's fun but looking at consistency, it's on the house, not the visitors. Obviously you are a big noob who doesn't know anything about gambling. Why are you promoting a casino if you really think that "no one could win consistently"? You want people to get scammed because of you? As I said above most of people won't earn money on the long run, and won't lose much money too. But many people will be able to win money on the long run and many people will lose big amounts of money too. That's the mathematical laws of every gambling game. Saying that "no one" could consistently win because of the house edge is a big bull shit from the common non-gamblers speech. |
|
|
|
|
On which games are you gambling currently @QuickAccount? I don't think you're really in danger if you manage to not lose big amounts of money. But you should be very careful about that and completely stop gambling with any game if you start to increase your stakes more and more. You should also try to limit your time spent on video and gambling games, and look for other hobbies.
|
|
|
|
PSG is still great in this League considering there is no competitor that will really threaten its position at this time and this season.
We are in the 5th round and PSG is already leading with 4 points, well without counting the lacking game between OM and Nice. Lille = total failure this season. Lyon isn't stable as usual. OM and Nice aren't bad for the moment but for how long? Angers won't stand there after a couple of rounds imo. PSG should create 2 teams, one in the Ligue 1 to keep that league competitive and another team in EPL or La Liga tho I agree with you, Lille is currently encountering a big failure at the beginning of this season. Bookmakers don't even trust in their ability to win against small teams. Lille will meet RC Lens next saturday and they are the underdogs of the match. That's unbelievable. RC Lens @2.55| Draw @3.35| LOSC Lille @2.80 |
|
|
|
What if it does more harm than good and actually provokes children to try gambling ?
Although the probability might be less since it would be taught as a subject or general awareness kind of thing but there have been cases where a particular awareness program actually stimulated people to do that particular thing.
But anyway, until the awareness is given in a positive way I think it's actually good to teach about the negative impacts of gambling to people.
At least gamblers would then not blame that they didn't know the impacts of gambling.
You're right this kind of awareness program can actually stimulate teenagers to try gambling games. But what do you suggest to do instead of that? On other threads, some morons are complaining about the lack of protection of children against gambling activities and ask for mandatory KYC on all gambling sites. |
|
|
|
This can only be prevented if the casinos will ask for a KYC which should not be the first option in crypto gambling since we know, we value our identity and we love to stay private but if those underaged gamblers increases, better to implement this one so we can still save their lives even if their parents are not helping at all. This is alarming, gambling will just ruin their life government should do something about it especially now that the world runs most of the time online.
Obviously you don't understand what Obito is saying : it's not our problem if you're not able to properly monitor your children, we don't care of them and you have not any legitimacy to impose KYC to all gamblers for just protecting your children. Your children are your problem not ours. |
|
|
|
Si je m'expatriais en Islande et que les Islandais m'accueillent, je ne serais pas choqué de cette obligation.
C'est un peu le but de la manœuvre je pense : de n'accueillir que des étrangers qui veulent devenir islandais et de dissuader les autres. Edit : C'est à mon avis ce que Zemmour cherche à faire, il ne voudrait accueillir que des étrangers qui lui ressemblent. |
|
|
|
I don't care if the females don't care. ...[snip]
So in brief you don't care until it concerns a female sport you like... But aren't you uncomfortable to see a (transgender) man beating a woman with his fists, his elbows, his knees and his legs? I found that horrible, she heavily bled from her mouth at the end of the fight. I feel sad for Celine Provost, I hope she won't be too much psychologically affected. Well, @mindrust does have a fair point due to the fact that the female participant had an option whether or not to participate. While I know that this is not ethically and morally correct due to some biological differences especially when it comes to their bone density where most of them does not get affected and change even if you undergo with to an operation, still this is a business where the money comes in. The point here is that the people behind this event were the ones who allowed them to have a/an fair unfair fight in the first place. And this simply means that once money is involved in such a firm, ethics will be left aside. What do you expect from a bUsineSS' point of view? You didn't get my point of view obviously. I'm not talking about fairness here, I would have been shocked in the same way if the transsexual man had been 2 weight classes below Celine Provost. What is unbearable for me here is to see a man hitting a woman with his fists. |
|
|
|
For the fun of it, i'm gonna bet short on BTC.
Because i suspect many will bet on long, and if by some random chance my side wins, gonna be a nice payout
How do you bet short or bet long here? I don't understand There is no such thing as "sides" like you say, you can only bet on $2500 price ranges. $45,001 - $47,500, $47,501 - $50,000, $50,001 - $52,500, etc. So please share a screenshot of your bet to show us on which range(s) you've bet on precisely. |
|
|
|
En effet j'ai vu le combat. Le transgenre américain était un ancien soldat des marines lol mais il faut avouer que la transition a plutot été réussi Avant  Après  Certes mais l'intérêt de changer de sexe pour finir avec un look de garçonne lesbienne et pratiquer des sports de mec, m'échappe un peu. En tous cas la française a été très sportive à la fin en le prenant dans les bras et en le félicitant, bravo à elle. Quand on la voit pisser le sang par la bouche c'est très dur, mais elle a été très forte et a même failli le mettre KO. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
