Are we talking about the funds that were sent to the people during the pandemic? If so, afaik, that action was actually done so as to stimulate the market. With how the market remained stagnant back then, the central bank had to do something since a stagnant economy isn't something one wants in their country. As for the idea of a zero inflation world, well, that just leads to a direct decrease in almost everything related to the economy. The decrease in production, decrease in wages, decrease in prices. You can also look up the disadvantages of zero inflation compared to low inflation, but imo the general idea of why it isn't something to be done is because it promotes low growth in the economy of a country.

Oh nice, I liked the explanation for provably fair for some games in the bottom part. I first thought it was just a site that listed sites that you guys verified as provably fair, glad that there was at the very least an explanation below, even if lengthy not that I understand most, especially when we're talking about seeds, but I'll try to

Well as long as it's trusted, not only by you but also by others, then not testing it strictly should be more than enough imo. Testing for Provably fair should only happen mostly in new casinos, to test if they're still following it properly, and most other sites would only be tested maybe once a month? There are tens of thousands of players on each casino anyway, there's probably at least one or two people out there that check the hashes to see if it matches.

Erm, flying on the fly isn't what I meant by straightforward, that's 2 different things imo. That's a "skill" in of itself, but the math behind it is plainly straightforward with no particular issues for errors. A result doesn't change randomly, it changes depending on the move made by you and the player against you, as well as the cards on the table. With those factors the only ones affecting the end result, it's a pretty straightforward calculation. Knowing said calculation does not guarantee a win though, since in the first place, the basis of the calculations is probabilities, and there isn't any 100% guarantee anywhere imo.

In the first place gambling while thinking of securing funds in the first place is already wrong imo, stop thinking of it as a loss or something similar, that's the first step. Mainly because of how gambling is supposed to be a "game". it's supposed to be enjoyed, and having to think of saving funds, how much money I still have, how much I've lost, I've won, and what not just stresses out that you're not thinking of it as a game, but rather as something else, can't find the word for it but and, it just brings out stress in you. Stop when you want to stop (or until your bankroll is gone), and that should be fine imo. Self-control starts with how much funds you actually put in your bankroll though, and that's about the limits of how you can control yourself. I'm pretty sure everyone here has felt that playing something with a serious mindset could make you forget some stuff afterall.

It would become easier IF the casino was a crypto one (naturally, since they'd need to accept crypto only since they're called one) or once people actually lost the idea of using fiat to spend, which is impossible, at least now (or ever imo, at least in my entire lifetime). There's a use for accepting crypto in physical casinos, yes, but it isn't a necessity. In the first place, Bitcoin is used either to help you stay anonymous or to send it internationally without any issues, both of which aren't really helpful when playing in an online casino.

There's already a thread about this if anyone is curious
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5293387.msg55685306#msg55685306
Anw, my take here is that the man in question seemed to have used Paypal itself as an exchange, with the repeated buys/sells over the weeks continuously. Though the idea stands of the not your keys not your coins kind of thing, it isn't the main issue imo, not that I know what Paypal actually wanted it to be, since given the current example, it doesn't look like it looks favorable to it being used as an exchange. If so, what exactly is the use of the feature they have to buy and sell crypto no?

Only discovered about OneCoin a few months back tbh, and I'm honestly amazed that she was able to make it that for in a ponzi scheme. It's like building a pyramid, but without anything inside, at all, and she even managed to finish it without anyone knowing. As for the police getting her, there's always the chance ofc, mostly with her being careless but I hardly doubt it. The police haven't caught here even after all this time, makes you think that they wouldn't catch her even if given more time.


Hmmm I hardly doubt it. I mean, if it were at this period, where a lot of scams were already unearthed, and their schemes are easily seen through due to past events, then anyone getting scammed at this point can be said to have reaped what they sow, but this issue was way back then, a lot of scams and schemes were still going through, and a lot of people were still getting fooled. Not to mention that the scam got founded in 2014, and yet only until as late as 2015 were there some people that found it to have some issues. And only till late 2016 was the scheme formally announced as a scam.

Well the scam did happen way back then after all, it's only natural that everything related to the scam was taken care of already. Not to mention that the damages back then were quite huge.

Well, it's like the fear of the unknown, or something similar. Only time could solve it, nothing we can do. Even if we force the idea of educating most of the people out there about Bitcoin,  It would still require time, and even then, it isn't guaranteed that people will accept it, so might as well let nature take its course. Look at how cars became, how TV, the internet came, it slowly integrated into society and wasn't really enforced by anyone. Afaik, there's no rule saying that you need to have a TV, Internet, or use cars to travel right? Most just let nature take its course since people would one way or another look for a better alternative for what they have right now, that is if they find one.

Let's not even mention how we can't please anyone, like how some people still refuse to use social media, use the internet, etc. so forcing it isn't really an ideal action.

In the end doesn't it all boil down to how Paypal is not an exchange? Based on what I understood, the account was blocked due to using it as some sort of exchange, buy low and sell high. I guess PayPal didn't like that, as said in the article it also indicated that Paypal bore the fees for those transactions so multiple transactions may damage them in the long run. Do they even indicate that such actions are not allowed in their ToS? or something? Since clearly, the ones at fault here are PayPal since they deployed that kind of model themselves, possibly without any warning of what to and not to do.

There's probably no issue if you use it to buy something, but in the case of the blocked account, the user bought and sold crypto, letting PayPal act as an exchange themselves. Seems like there's little to no fee from what I understood, since if there was, I see no reason why Paypal would ban the dude from doing that since they profit in the end.

Probably better to move this to speculation? And if you want to ask questions about it, just browse through there imo. There are a lot of threads talking about prices, especially at this moment when ATH is almost here. As for climbing up to a new ATH, it's completely possible, and the situation is actually leaning towards it imo. Most were expecting the price to reach these heights at the end of the year, and having it a few weeks earlier seem to indicate that $20k might not be the minimum heights achievable. Ofc, there's still the chance that a massive sell off would happen, with most people either just wanting to break even from when they bought back in 2017, or people looking for a quick profit that bought back in the crash last march.

People considering Bitcoin price increasing as a bubble is quite inevitable imo, it's a highly volatile asset after all. Seeing it increasing and decreasing in high increments every few years should be quite natural if you're familiar with how the market moves since back then.


Just like what others have said, it's just a bonus. It amplified the fact that Bitcoin is and cannot be affected by the events of what's happening in irl since it technically has no backings or what not. The crash back then most likely happened due to people expecting the pandemic to actually somehow affect Bitcoin, and everyone just basically followed suite, which resulted in that loss. But time did tell that Bitcoin was saying no to that, bouncing back up in quite a few months contrary to other stocks.

Why do people only reach the conclusion that once Bitcoin grows the only end would be the abolishment of the banking sector? There's quite a clear cut difference imo, most of it lands upon the QoL improvements crypto and the bank could give. Bitcoin, or crypto in general, provides anonymity as well as international transfers without much issue, but you manage your own funds yourself, safeguard it yourself, handle the fees (calculate when pool is free or not if you want to skimp on it) and stuff like that, while Banks do get your info, but in return makes transactions more automated (supposedly). It's like the fight between having privacy and manual, and no privacy but automated transactions imo.

1. No
2 and 3. a centralized government that keeps tracks of the general BTC addresses of most people, which basically defeats the logic of decentralization tbh, which is why I doubt banks would get abolished.

Free playsssss. Bonuses are lies imo, they give you additionals just to lose them one way or another to them. Well, if both were added, then why not. I just hope the pandemic hasn't killed the casinos business spirit  Christmas spirit. A lot of people would be quite happy in getting a few free plays here and there, and tbh, their bonuses are just a way for more people to spend money in a low key way.

Maybe a lottery with the said prizes, and the entrance ticket is either free or if the casinos want to profit, the entrance ticket is based on reaching x amount gambled in their site. Ofc, there's only one ticket per person, since if multiple tickets were allowed, whales would have way too much of an advantage and the lottery would probably lose it's purpose.

The death of the internet maybe? Though the chances are highly unlikely so that may just be a stupid opinion I dropped. Uhm, no they can't, if you fully use how Bitcoin is supposed to work that is. And as for the government, no they don't have full control over the economy. I'd like to think of it as a partial control, but full control? Nope. Cause if so, then the progress would have been mostly positive all the time, and no recessions or what not could've happened. They at most could take advantage of disasters in the market to profit, but that's about it.
The chances of that happening are as close as what I thought of a threat is the death of the internet. Really, it isn't impossible, I agree, but what are the chances of it happening right? I'm pretty sure you're supposed to think of threat levels together with the chances of it happening.

Who died and made you the boss? Heck nevermind, even the boss has in no way the right to determine the life span of Bitcoin. Bitcoin has, for a decade already, have had issues with fees as well as transaction speed, and yet nothing close to it disappearing has happened. Just goes to show that its advantages outweigh the disadvantages it currently has, and heck afaik lightning network is already in development to combat the problem with transaction speed. Not to mention that its core feature, which is decentralization, defeats every other type of currency out there no matter how they introduce theirs as a "decentralized" coin.

And a price correction or your so-called collapse is always a thing, always has been. I'm pretty sure everyone does. Who expects a coin, or any other investment at that, to just keep on going and increasing it's price right?

Well naturally, once a guaranteed safety proven vaccine is out, we can expect everything to return back slowly to the norm. Though I do hope the governments all over the world take it slowly instead of rushing it. A sample test of a few hundreds or thousands of tests may be enough to prove it's safe, but not 100% imo. A month of observation and still continued social distancing should be advised just to make sure that the vaccine is indeed working, and no new types or whatever that may have evolved is spreading out.

Not to mention that China themselves didn't really see the problem with the virus and only realized it a tad bit too late. Their citizens who of which are already infected started migrating towards other countries in fear of the virus when they themselves were actually carriers. The simple realization of what a virus without a cure could do should've dawned on them quite early, but it didn't sadly enough.

Didn't WPN just recently allow players to be paid using BTC just recently? Here's the discussion link about it
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5291580.msg55637278#msg55637278

Considering that more than 95% are asking for it, I guess it's understandable that they'd buy $100m, or maybe even more worth of Bitcoin just to accommodate payments to players. This is basically still a profit for them anyhow, they're still basically earning money off of players, and with even more players joining in due to the entrance of crypto availability, you can expect that they'd actually be winning off of this in the long run. And as mentioned, most people are asking for it especially right now due to the bull run we're experiencing. It's like everyone that was waiting for this moment is now in steroids, and is basically infecting everyone else, new or old in the crypto scene.

It isn't like a guaranteed thing or anything, but most of the market follows the general trend of what Bitcoin does, plus, most altcoins are paired with Bitcoin, so it's kind of a natural thing. It's kind of like getting swept up by the wave, but then again, it isn't a guarantee for most coins. And also, Bitcoin increasing in price is not a prerequisite or anything for altcoins to rise in the market, altcoins themselves could rise in price independently without any relationship with Bitcoin price, but that's another thing.

Not really no? Just that BTC itself imo has a huge influence due to being the first cryptocurrency as well as the only one that can be coined as the truly decentralized coin. Other coins can develop themselves, and increase in price themselves. Maybe take a peek at the release of eth 2.0 and see what happens.

Well, it could be an option. Limiting retirement funds into Bitcoin seems detrimental so having the option to choose either Fiat or Bitcoin (or any other crypto, if possible) seems the better choice. Some people out there may not like leaving their retirement funds to a volatile asset. And on that note honestly, the person themselves could just simply invest in Bitcoin and exchange it once they retire. It's the same logic, and at the same time, guaranteed that the Bitcoin is yours since as you said, not your keys, not your coins. Especially since Bitcoin volatility would most likely remain until at the very least, the time when supply is stopped or is at the end, which is still a little bit over a century from now on.

Are we talking about crypto dying in the sense of its usage, as a currency, or in the sense of it as an existence? Cause if it's the former, unless the war would destroy the world, then it's impossible. If it's the latter, well let's see, a war would naturally put blockades and the like in interaction between each country, and anyone traced of doing so could be locked up temporarily, but with Bitcoin, I'm pretty sure one can bypass that without being discovered. So my answer would be no I guess? As long as there's users, then it would naturally exist.

BUT, the idea of it living forever is still questionable imo, since we're quite limited in what we think right now. Heck we never know what could possibly be the next type of currency or whatever form economy would take up in the next few centuries, so saying it would live for forever is wrong.