Well, on the one hand it seems to have happened what most expected, that Bitcoin spot ETFs have increased demand driving the price up. But this is a double-edged sword that just as it can make it go up it can make it go down. It also pushes Bitcoin even further away from the initial idea of P2P.


That's not going to happen, at least for a significant percentage of spot ETF investors.

Being the only exception if they have no more money than they had in that casino. Normally such barriers do not stop irresponsible gambling. It reminds me of those who win a jackpot, in a moment of lucidity withdraw the money, and after a few hours deposit it again to end up betting it and losing everything. That is why some casinos consciously put impediments and delay withdrawals.

I speak from memory but I would say that I once saw phillip say that he had problems with gambling in the past, probably that's why for him joining a gambling signature campaign is something that's not even on the table for him. And although there are other options, they are limited, although he should not have any problem to be hired. He is the human with the most posts in the forum (the first is ChartBuddy), which is attractive in terms of SEO, and the second most recognized.


Well me recognizing that NotATether is a good forum member and a high quality poster in general I have complained to him a few times that he had not read before replying in some of my threads, and with what you say I am not surprised. If he writes 18 posts in an hour it's because he doesn't analyze much in some of the threads at least.

False. LFC, philipma1957 or JJG as Amphenomenon says are examples of the contrary.


I don't know what you expect to know in an anonymous forum about them. The most you can know is about those who gave the interview but little else, and that was focused on what they think of bitcoin and the forum, not so much on them.

I understand your position but I don't think it makes much difference whether I support the flag now or next week, I just wouldn't want to rush into it. I just learned about it now. I hadn't read your thread before today. So I'm just going to wait a bit and see what other people say also.

It is what it is, they are the rules of the house, and someone very concerned about their privacy who always uses vpns or Tor may not like that rule. But the house is as free to impose the rule as he is to decide whether to play or not. If he decides to play in the casino without respecting the rule, he knows what he risks.

The bolded part cannot be so because by simple compound interest there could be no winning poker players, and Germany has produced a very good number of them. I think you are confusing the tax that is applied to pots or buy-ins with the tax that is applied to profits, to which income tax is applied.

As for the tax residency in Germany that the OP asks, it is the same as in other countries in Europe: you have to spend a minimum of 6 months living there.

This for people who are in the same case as the OP, living very close to a country with a better tax treatment, it is very tempting to rent a house to claim tax residency but without actually spending the required time. To this I have to warn that the tax authorities of the countries have become more and more sophisticated and can analyze things like electricity consumption or credit card payments and if you have not spent the minimum time you are going to have a problem.

I just read the thread because I have seen the request for support to the flag created by GekkeBelg against the casino, and I would just like a representative of the casino to give his version before deciding. It sounds quite plausible to me, a casino that gives you all the facilities to deposit but when it comes to withdraw an important amount everything is problems. We have seen that style of behavior countless times, which is unethical to say the least if not outright scam.

I will wait for now.

The problem is how many of the new shitcoins are going to pumped hard, especially compared to the ones that are going to lose value and go to 0 fast. I hope that woman, assuming she is a woman, gets thrown in jail soon for scamming. For that she better recommend people to play the lottery directly. She is telling people that a good way to earn money is to play the lottery, but in this case buying shitcoins.

Lol. Ask a mathematician who specializes in statistics applied to games and you will see how he tells you that luck does not exist. What we call luck is a shorthand for variance, or statistical deviation of average outcomes.


It does not make sense. If you mean on a given day, it may be 1 or it may be 10, but in the long run, the larger the sample, the more towards the average the results tend.


Any supposed correlation in this sense is the result of pure imagination.


Of course not.

What you say is not accurate, shasan. If you see the negative feedback I left LL, I refer to the delay in processing large withdrawals. And in a thread on Reputation where we talked about it I said:


But in the end, people who have certain habits, a personality, it is impossible for them to change it when they have reached a certain age, and I don't know how old LL will be, but I'm sure he has reached the age where one no longer changes his personality.

I agree with you, and that's the first thing I thought when I read the OP. However, I think this is going to become more popular than we would like. Just like people use custodial wallets and buy Bitcoin on centralized exchanges, they will buy Bitcoin in their 401k or equivalents when the option is implemented. I have a pension plan, not a 401k exactly because I don't live in the USA, and I don't have Bitcoin there. The Bitcoin I do have is managed by me with my private keys. It makes the most sense.

I don't think it is a question of should or shouldn't. In general, someone wealthier is going to tend to play at higher stakes as a matter of percentages. A multi-millionaire can lose tens of thousands of dollars in a one night session and not bat an eye, as what he lost is a small percentage relative to his wealth. There would be no point in playing smaller stakes because it would not be exciting enough and a multi-millionaire is not going to find it exciting to walk away with $100 profit if he has a good session and wins that night.


Less risk in absolute terms but not in relative terms. Let's say that someone with an annual income of $0.5M can leave in the casino with little risk to his finances 1% per month, which would be $5K. Someone with an annual income of $50K should leave a maximum of $50, which is much less in absolute terms, but still 1% of their annual income.

Well, it's also good for the network, since a higher hashrate means more security. What I wonder is whether increasing the energy level for mining won't fuel the narrative that Bitcoin consumes too much energy and is not environmentally friendly.


Most of us believe it is most likely. It is certainly not a sure thing, but like everything in life and in investments, there is always a risk you have to take, a level of gamble that you don't know if it will work out. That double price would mean reaching $90K and I think all of us in this think it will reach and pass $100K, otherwise it's going to be the most catastrophic cycle by far since Bitcoin was launched.

Well, if you look at the site of the best investor in the world, it looks like it's on ftp or something. It's laughable:

https://www.berkshirehathaway.com/

So, if freebitco.in has a business that is doing very well, with increasing revenue every year, I don't see why they have to change the design. What they have been doing over time is implementing more functionalities, some of which worked and stayed and others didn't (I'm thinking of cloud mining for example). So I don't see it as a priority to change the design.

I see two things here. One is that unfortunately it is not the first time I have seen an addict say that he has requested to close the account or be self-excluded to then be able to freely access the site. It seems to me that at least in some cases there may be an intentionality on the part of the room, which I am not saying it is in this case.

The second has to do with owlcatz's comments. In cases like this I see the addict complaining a lot about the site, and forgetting about himself. Here the most likely scenario is that if the OP had not been able to access Rollbit he would have gone to another room where he would have deposited and most likely lost the money as well. So better to focus on curing the addiction.

Well, here I go to my point, and that is that there are people who have an income thanks to gambling, although it is a little more difficult to be steady and regular, but playing poker for example, if you play cash it is more regular than if you play tournaments. What I'm getting at is that some people's income is poker, or sports betting. But for most of them it is a complement, an extra income and it is important to have another stable income to be able to afford expenses. Apart from that, good bankroll management and good personal finance management in general is also necessary.

As a general rule, economic downturns are fabulous opportunities to buy on the cheap. I know people who struck gold in the 2007 crisis by buying Real Estate at bargain prices. If stocks and shares are your thing, you can take advantage to buy cheap when there is a downturn. Or buy Bitcoin, the recent inflation crisis coincided with a drop in price to $17K. When there is panic in the streets and everyone is selling it is an opportunity to buy.

As far as I can see, nothing has changed. Again with delays in processing withdrawals, just like one of the signature campaigs has been paused, again, after the other one was paused recently, because it hasn't refilled the escrow and doesn't give signs of life. It seems like groundhog day all over again.


Yes, this is the most normal thing that can happen, but this is not the way a serious person and a serious business operates.

Without knowing too much about the subject, I understand that this is due to pure statistical variability. An improbable but not impossible event that ends up happening, just as there are people who hit the lottery jackpot, however improbable it may be. As of today I see that they are the first mining pool, so it is not so strange.