It's a problem for the entire internet really. An ad can't really be called a scam until someone has already been scammed, and to tally that, they have to submit proof and whatnot. Only then will social media companies start removing related ads. Sadly, it's a lot of effort imo (and that it's relatively unknown to most) for people to submit scam accusations especially if they can't even get their money back. Not to mention scammers can easily buy up another few slots of ads under a different name.

But, well, I doubt Elon would do much. He loves the words "freedom of speech" after all.

It's not random lol. The house always takes a cut from the money users spent, and the rest goes into the pot to attract more people to play it. Now this isn't anything wrong imo, it's just how businesses work. They simply have to take profit from something that they let their users spend on, just like how rentals ask for fees. Might seem unfair since it's a lottery, which in essence is only a paper, or dice rolls which is comparable to a single click of your mouse but hey, we're the dumb ones that use it.

Anyway casinos are pretty transparent about how much they take from the users and how much users are able to get from their winnings. Try exploring the site, it should pop out on one of their ToS or related rules or something.

For those out of the loop, ya'll should look up Cofeezillas video about his scam. Pretty great video that summarizes what happened and what the actual hell Logan did as an answer to people in relation to his "refunds". And at that, I'm still rather dumbfounded how there's still people who defend him, that he at least "refunded" people which is, btw, not even a complete refund and asks for everyone, and literally everyone, who filed a lawsuit to him which btw, includes even those who may not receive a refund, to drop it.

Oh, and this only includes the NFT's iirc. This does not include refunds with relation to the cryptozoo token afaik? Yeah, people should continue the lawsuit and get what they deserve.

If it were my mom then why the hell not? I'm pretty open when it comes to it and would probably enjoy some family bonding with some malding experience though. If it were someone else though, I don't particularly think I'd give a damn unless they were dying in front of me. I don't think I have the right to judge others when I myself am gambling every now and then, regardless of any age difference between me and them. If it were a kid I might offer some advice though but this is an old lady. I'd probably get attacked instead of being appreciated when I offer any advice really.

Don't the algorithms and formulas used by casinos use random (or pseudo) numbers? Even if you knew the algorithm, as long as you can't find that key number that lets you discover the result, it doesn't matter if you had the algorithm or not. It probably increases your chances of being able to guess a game though by brute forcing it across x number of games, but it's not necessarily a guarantee to winning one. Otherwise devs or anyone who knew the algorithm would have quite the field day for it.

Naturally. Any sort of addiction can affect not just you, nor your relatives, but literally anyone in your surroundings whether it be your neighbors, workmates, friends, and whatnot. That's just how life goes. Unless you're a really secluded person that lives in the middle of a forest, anything you do can have significant effects to your surroundings, the scale just differs I guess depending on how much you mean to them.

It's not necessarily gambling itself though. I mean, there's a lot of gamblers out there that are pretty responsible, myself included (I hope).

Is nothing groundbreaking here? I reckon this is how most people or professionals go about treating people with addiction in general. Except for the medicine part, now that I'm not exactly sure of. And as for asking answers to dumb questions by addicts, I don't think your average internet dude should be the guy you're asking from. And in the first place, a dude wanting to go into rehab would certainly not argue that he still wants to gamble more and instead would strive to change, and that mindset is usually more than enough with some added support from other people. And as for "forcing" people to go into rehab, I don't think gambling addiction is that far into the level of severity? Unlike drugs or something similar afaik.

Is it a guaranteed win or just to have a chance? If it was a guarantee then hell yea I'd do it, if it was a chance only then I'd have to think a bit more depending on my current circumstances. $50 is a pretty big thing to spend in one instance in my country just to gamble in one sitting. I might try it after payday though, should be possible I probably wouldn't have much to spend for myself for the rest of the time till I get my next pay.

Still looks appealing regardless of my chances though tbf.

Memecoin. It just used some few keywords that are rather well-known in the crypto scene, which are btc and inu, and has absolutely no relation to those two. Just from that you can already expect that it has close to zero sense and no relation to the project, nor a speck of originality. Well according to them they're trying to overtake the two, so I guess they needed some sort of remembrance that they're related or something.

And, well, granted the webpage literally has it in bold (not that big though) font when you visit it that it calls itself a memecoin. And a Bitcoin 2.0 at that, a rather weird combination.

Hmm, we've already reached 60k, I don't think it's that out of reach. I guess a final answer can be ultimately reached after a year or so? it's the period when I predict the effect of halving will take effect, which is the period where Bitcoin has shown massive growth in its past decade. Not to mention that the current price we already have is almost half of said 100k, so just from that there's enough of a chance to bet on it imo. As for when, well, that's a whole nother thing imo.

And I'd like to think that there's still a lot of people who don't know about Bitcoin and once they show positive interest, you can probably expect demand to increase, albeit slowly.

Web3 is still a thing? I've never seen any that showcased it properly. Random projects that say that they use Web3 or implement it seem like just your average crypto project, and in the case that that's what Web3 actually means then I don't think there's any sense it in, nor any possible potential. Care to share some of these "Web3" projects though that actually have potential? And is said passive income even actual income or just some random dead token.

Wish it never comes back. Really. Regardless of how the industry wants to develop the NFT scene to something proper, some people will always come and turn it into something similar to what the art scene has, and, well, since money is a big influence to it, it's rather easy to do so. I still see some artists doing some proper NFTs but they're in the minority at this point. As for any other use case, I'd expect something similar to videos or something next lmao. As for real world, that's just not NFT anymore, that's just your average item paid with crypto.

Never heard of it before. Isn't this most likely just an edge case that the podcast talked about since, well, it was an edge case so it was a rather rare situation for them as well? Tbf they can just bs their way to describe some random stuff sometimes since it makes no sense (at least to me) how the day of the week would manage to influence the bets. Though I guess you can reason out that the underdogs don't seem too bad compared to the losing teams of earlier matches, so the odds get adjusted based on that. Probably.

I don't think it matters much? I'm certain I'll take the reviews more objectively though and probably cross-reference it with other review sites, but in the end, that's what I do for other review sites as well anyway. I cross-reference them across various reviews that I stumble upon from forums, groups, to review sites themselves.

I'd say what OP says is viable yes,  but it's only ever a problem if said user was using their site as the sole source of a review. Plus if we were to start minding about fake reviews here, then the same could be said with other reviews. Who knows whether they're paid reviews or not.

Probably wouldn't, sounds rather boring. I've betted on Miss world before so I have experience with these kinds of bets. As for the US election I think I just watched the bet itself happen? Didn't have enough money sadly. Those two were much more fun to watch really, has more "oomph" to it if I were to describe it. Waiting for the SEC to make a decision on the other hand... well, sounds really boring. And while I myself am waiting for what the results would be, betting itself would be another thing.

I've learned this late in life that bothering about what people think of you or what you do is just a pain in the ass and an absolute waste of time. That is, unless, you were specifically aiming for their recognition/acceptance or something in the first place. Which, btw, should not be a regular thing to expect from anyone on the street, unless you're a politician in which case you do indeed need literally everyone on the street's recognition.


Now in cases where you do need their recognition or something similar, then that's when you start thinking about how to explain, how to reach a consensus, or just a middleground for the both of you. There's usually one in most cases, especially if you're both important to each other. In OPs case I reckon it's just blind knowledge of gamblers (which is what media portrays it to be, so I can't exactly deny that it's true, but not the entirety) but I reckon a simple explanation and a simple look at OP himself can explain how it's a big generalization.

Cause it's true. Rich people have more instances to play in casinos due to being, well, rich, so it equates to more chances of winning and equates to them winning more compared to the poor. On the other hand, the same could be said about losing though since they lose more compared to your average joe. The difference is in almost all cases, they can afford the loss. And maybe even 10x more of that with still room to spare. Unlike most low-middle-class gamblers who spend everything, including money for their basic needs.

I've done it a couple of times before when I was new to lottery. Sadly it brought about zero changes so I just gave up on trying to win (though I do every now and then buy two or three more tickets) and just spent the rest of whatever I planned to spend with scratch tickets since they give out immediate gratification, which is kind of addictive tbh but hey, it is what it is. It also doesn't help how my family buys tickets rather often as well so I just think of those tickets as my "multiples" really.

Damn that was a nice catch. I'm surprised that no one else caught it out (since Keno would've probably adjusted it or something once they notice) or was the promotion just short-lived or something? Sadly I don't think I've ever heard of a promotion for lotteries in our country. I've rarely even heard any changes with the lotteries that we have even, the only change I've noticed in my decades here were the addition of scratch cards but anything outside of that is nothing. Well, granted that it is government controlled, can't really expect much.

Riggedddd. RIGGEEEDDD. At least in this current era. Did a bit of searching and it seem slike it's a really old event? Back when rules still had loopholes that people can take advantage of, which this guy did imo. He basically set up a few rules that the lottery had to fall under and he played his tickets based on that (not to mention that you can print your own damn ticket back then which makes things a LOT easier). Not to mention that he spent quite a LOT of money to buy tickets since it'd probably fall under millions to take into account every possible winning combination. Seems like he even took in investors for this scheme. I'd say skill, but really, it's more like bruteforcing than anything else.