poker can be profitable because it is inherently a different game; the of fundamental difference that changes this fact is that poker is player vs player, instead of vs the house. do some reading, it can and is profitable with skill and experience.

continuing off what I wrote above, gambling is the furthest thing from entertainment for these professionals; it's serious work in their minds. it's their source of income. might be different for some others, but last time I checked, work isn't exactly fun.

a losing strategy if you ask me, but to each their own I guess.

it's possible to lose out on any game in gambling, don't know why you would say otherwise. it's also not entirely likely you'll get strings of wins I poker either; it still boils down to being a game of chance, no amount of skill can change the cards you're dealt. conversely, it's also possible to get strings of wins in dice, it's just that you have very little control over that besides your odds / multiplier.

you've got pretty loose arguments there; the dollar, euro, whatever, can be used by drug dealers, terrorists, you name it. does the fact that terrorists might be using the euro as their currency cause governments to shun the euro? pretty sure they don't. and you fail to state exactly why using bitcoin is so 'risky.' you provided a statement, now back it up. I'll agree that governments are studying bitcoin and related technologies though, weather or not they will accept it after said studies are complete are an entirely other matter though.

so? it's not like an entire coin has to be used in a transaction; bitcoin is divisible into parts that equate to 10*-8 of a bitcoin: 1 satoshi. your logic here isn't quite solid, even though I do agree that bitcoin probably won't be the cryptocurrency of the future.
as for the second part of your argument, it's just a theoretical wall that bitcoin has hit; in the coming forks we should see the network congestion get worked out and the network should be stable again.

governments also can't track or control how cold, hard cash trades hands everyday (paper money, coins), but that doesn't mean they fear it. sure they might control the currency of the nation or state they operate in, but as for small trades, they cannot hope to monitor what every individual does with their money. in this sense, bitcoin is more traceable than hand to hand cash trades; there is a public ledger where every transaction is recorded, as well as many tools available that can even associate multiple addresses with a single wallet. if anything, the government would fear that bitcoin cannot be taxed and therefore would impact their economies.

there's no such thing as a 0% risk investment, otherwise everyone and their grandmothers would be pouring their money into it. even if you cannot immediately see what risks may be involved, there's always something. for example, imagine what might happen to bitcoin if the US government decided to declare it as illegal for use in the states within the month; bitcoin and crpytocurrency based companies and projects in the states would disappear, as well as any exchanges or large hubs of exchange. just imagine the effect this would have on the bitcoin market; prices would practically be in free fall if that were to be announced.

keep in mind investments aren't a guarantee; while the term 'investment' does carry with it the implication of assurance, those profits are based on whatever you invested in reliably making money. let's take a casino, for instance. if said casino has a high roller come along and take off after a few big wins, your investment will depreciate. at the same time, if no one plays at the casino, your investment will stagnate.

gambling can most definitely be a source of income, otherwise professional poker player's wouldn't be a thing.

investing also carries with it a minimal risk and can be expected to be +EV, which in most cases gambling cannot accomplish given house rules.

as title says, looking to trade my btc for paypal funds, 110 usd worth at the preev rate at time of trade. only trading with trusted members with a solid trading history, no problem going first with the right people. may ask for a signed message if i've had no interaction with you in the past or if you've reset pw / email.

trading platforms such as the ones you listed (etoro, plus500) are brokerages / investing platforms from what i can tell and may or may not have an option to be investing into cryptocurrency. I've no experience with either of those, but it doesn't seem to me that they're bitcoin related services, but serve to invest your fiat money into various funds (stocks, s&p 500, other international currencies). They might have plans and options where they invest a portion of your funds into cryptocurrencies, which is why you might have come across them.
bitcoin exchanges (circle, coinbase) exist solely as a means to exchange (buy / sell) cryptocurrencies and fiat on a trusted platform. they will not take investments or help your money 'grow' as the brokerages would. they're two totally different types of services.

I'd agree that no nation would convert their financial backing entirely to bitcoin, but not necessarily because of the lack of control and decentralization. I would say no nation would risk something as big as having their economy backed by an extremely volatile asset over something more stable such as gold. the market cap of bitcoin and the nation / state's ability to acquire that much bitcoin is questionable as well.

but plenty of people have gotten rich off of bitcoin and related technologies; your statement is only valid if you say it was an 'instant' way to get rich. many people even now are a great deal wealthier tho bought bitcoin even just a year ago when it was hover 200 ~300 dollars. i mean, in the grand scheme of things, to have an investment pay off 1000% within a year or two is almost miraculous. weather history can repeat itself over the next few years is an entirely different matter though; o personally do not see bitcoin rising to the 5 digit mark for at least 5 years.

bitcoin has been, and still is, an experiment. bitcoin might not be the currency of the future, but i believe it certainly is a good first step towards the currency of the future. as we step into a digital age, its fitting that we have a digital currency, and bitcoin is just the first step of trial and error. bitcoin has its flaws; we're seeing that right  now with all the unconfirmed transactions and skyrocketing fees. however, an actual technology, perfected off of what bitcoin has showed us, may very well be the currency our grandchildren will use on a daily basis.

currency by my definition is the legal tender of a nation or state; it does not have to be centralized, it just has to be the nation / state's officially accepted form of currency.

impulses are natural, it's just part of being human to have such impulses to do things you enjoy. I think your definition of addiction is either loose or classifying addiction to gambling as a different type altogether. personally, I'd mark a person as an addict (to anything, really) if they were consciously making the decision to pursue their addiction at the cost of something that may not be worth the trade-off or is a basic necessity. for example, if someone didn't pay their electricity bill to use the money at a casino, I'd consider them an addict.

correct me if im wrong, but i think if most of the miners (51%) decide to reject the transactions, the transactions will eventually be rejected by the network and either disappear (again, if im wrong correct me) or never be processed without a block being mined by a pool / miner specifically trying to confirm that transaction, rendering that transaction essentially useless without miners trying to confirm it (specifically).
the case in which a transaction might be 'deleted' is if the coins are double spent, but I doubt that'll ever happen with spam transactions.

bad idea tbh, core is slow to download the chain as is; nodes might have a lot of trouble keeping up if blocks ever get that big.

you've already got your answer. how do you just now 'notice' making a 'mistake?' you have to have been fully aware you were plagiarizing posts, you don't do that accidentally.

you act like its a given that everyone loses out in the end, which isnt true at all. theres a chance to win, and a chance to lose; given the chance to lose is inherently larger in a game with a house edge.
the same observation you make of trading holds true for skill / experience based games as well, namely something like poker. veteran players with talent for the game can reliably profit off of worse players (it sounds bad to say, but it's a fact, worse poker players will generally lose out in the end of a  long game) and even go off to make a living.

wrong. there is always a chance that a coin can drop to being worth next to nothing.

you mind telling us who the illuminati are next?

if it didn't say how long the ban is / when you can use the forum again in the message, then it's permanent.

not true at all. poker is one of the few exceptions here; a good player will have a advantage and can generally expect to net profit off of worse players consistently. the house has no part in these games, they only host the game and take a rake as their fee. it's one of the few situations where a 'win - win' outcome is possible.

I think otherwise; if you can reliably manage your bet sizes based on the variance you put on your own predictions, I think it's entirely possible to net a consistent profit. forgive me if I worded that badly, pretty sure it wasn't the best choice of words.

I mean, im pretty sure if they accepted it, you could buy just about anything with gold and silver (along with other precious metals / commodities), but that doesn't make gold / money. personally, I define money as the legal tender of a nation or state, and until that is so, bitcoin won't be something I can consider money in my own definition. a highly liquidatable asset describes it a lot better in its current state.