If we take care of ourselves to gamble, we won't need to see what people are thinking. There are some gamblers who become so crazy about gambling that they are ready to do anything to gamble they are not aware of anything people say a lot about these gamblers. That's why gamblers don't have to worry about what people say if they are aware of gambling and not reckless.
correct as long as you are not disturbing nor hurting anyone people will never care about what you are doing and of course as long as people are not seeing anything bad for themselves as well because sometimes come to show concern because we are human of course not counting those stupid karen or those who only cares for what they can find wrong to others. Lol...well, it's your life, it's your money and your right as well. Those are my rules in this life even as I live my private life that is not even warranting anyone to poke their nose in my affairs. But at the same time, it is good that we listen to and care about some of them, especially if what they are telling you is the right thing, to say the least. This could be in many cases/forms, especially when the gambling activity is not positive for the life of the gambler and makes him irresponsible. The earlier you care about what people say for your own good, the better for you. But those gamblers who could be proud are those who are not gambling badly and are responsible in doing it. Even if they do not win often, they are not such that gambling has turned their lives miserably. They have a lot to be proud of, but not the dirty gamblers who are only addicts. Such has caused the attention and interference of people to themselves, so what do you expect? This is why the "cared and uncared attitudes" of a thing are subjective and we should treat them based on the personality of the persons in question. It's not always about being headstrong, it can't always vindicate us. |
|
|
|
That's right, it means that there are two wastes here, namely losing money and time for nothing, actually all of that happens because they have such high hopes for victory that they give up most of their time and money to start the game hopefully, even though it is very clear that having high hopes for something that has absolutely no certainty and guarantee whatsoever will only increase the possibility of disappointment at the end of the session when everything ends up with results that are not what they expected.
This is why it is very important for a gambler to have a healthy mindset and a rational point of view, not least because that ability will be useful to make them make the right decisions that do not lead to an impulsive or excessive approach when it comes to treating gambling activities.
Having uncertain hopes for the results is clearly a mistake and in gambling there are many gamblers who are too obsessed with winning even though it is clear that there will also be defeats which will often occur and they will experience them but for some reason the hopes and perceptions are not yet real. That's exactly what they continue to do instead of stopping immediately. Yes, I totally agree with you, as gamblers we have to have a good and correct mindset and perspective because the goal is so that we don't see that gambling is an activity that will make a lot of money, on the contrary, that is, lose a lot of money, so we have to always be careful there. Exactly, as you said above and I will repeat it that the biggest mistake of a gambler is when they put excessive hopes on winning or those who are too obsessed with winning that they don't even hesitate to risk large sums of money, when in reality however gambling is a gambling activity that bets your money on two possibilities at the end of the session which is between winning or losing, So of course the idea of focusing too much on winning in the end as I said that it will only increase the possibility of disappointment at the end of the session when it turns out that what happens instead is defeat, but it is natural because after all defeat is a part that can never be separated in gambling. This is why it is always advisable to bring a rational mindset and point of view when you want to engage in gambling activities, the benefits are clear so that you see gambling in a balanced way and not only see in terms of winning opportunities but also see in terms of possible risks and this is also the reason why a gambler is always advised to only bet small amounts, none other than so that you can accept the risk of losing and also so that you don't get too emotional when it turns out that the results at the end of the session are not as expected. Yes, and the point is that we as gamblers must have a clear mind about gambling itself because gambling is an activity that is about chance of the results obtained later and we must always be ready to accept the results wisely because whether it is good or bad, that is the risk that will arise. What happens there is victory and defeat. And I agree with your opinion that we should only gamble with small money because it is a safe way so that we don't regret it if we lose and lose our money easily and quickly. No one goes to gambling with the intent of doubling their profits all the time and not being negatively affected one way or another. It is even an aberration in gambling for someone to beforehand have the mindset of success to be made. Such gamblers are always losing and getting discouraged which is not a good thing. The mindset of gamblers must be neutral and refined, but the gambler must however be well-prepared for what is ahead of him. This way, the gambler may get prepared for the way to gamble and the budget/managerial means that will not let them lose their money easily. Gambling is not what we should have that desperate plan about, otherwise, we will continue to lose in our folly. Also, it depends on the aspect of gambling we are talking about as it is easier in one aspect than in the other. It is easier in sports betting to make money than in casino bettings which require a higher degree of luck as the odds of the chances are so much against the gamblers since they are in the favour of the house in most cases. This is why we should always be prepared for the worst instead of having the belief that we will have a certain success in gambling. What if it fails? That can only lead to one thing, and that is desperation and frustration. |
|
|
|
I am on the verge of giving up gambling because every time I play with the last money on the deposit, I lose. Slots, poker, betting - always. My last bets always turn out to be losers, and it seems to me that luck is not on my side in this case. Recently, while playing slots, I made 8 spins and did not win any prizes. It's just a shame. Statistically, I should have won. Perhaps it's time for me to admit that I'm not lucky in the field of gambling and this is not the place where I'll get rich :/
It is never possible for every gambler to get lucky while staking their last cash. That doesn't go well with me at all and besides, it is a very big risk. I am a student and there are just some level of risk I can take with the money I get from my parents. @summonerrk, I am as unlucky as use if I mistakenly gamble with my last cash. Student or not, the change is slim so it's so irresponsible to have such a huge belief in that. This is one of the many things we preach against here, we should not be desperate in gambling whatsoever, not to the point that we will now be using our last cards to bet. That money is better used for the right purpose, what if it is lost to gambling? No matter how little the money is, it is not worth it to sort for another money to do the same purpose the original money should have done simply because we gambled with it. Fine, the OP was happy, just because he is lucky, but how much more of those who will be the victim of that circumstance? Who knows if the OP had even done such again and regretted it afterwards, so it is so bad. In my experience, those who use their last card and get the luck from it can't be up to 5%, so why take such a high risk (95%) when the chance is so minimal? That's so irresponsible and unreasonable if I must say. |
|
|
|
Because nowadays the younger ones take gambling more seriously then school. Yesterday i got back home early so I decided to step out and go to a betting shop to catch some fun while gambling, I saw two teenagers gambling with their school uniforms on them.
I asked someone besides me why did they allow this boy's to come in with their uniforms and gamble, he said did they put any restrictions that younger ones are not allowed to gamble. I said but it's not normal, I replied him what if this are your kids would you be happy seeing them gambling with their uniforms on them. So what do you guys think about this situation at hand now.
What I think about this situation is that you overexaggerate things, it is not as bad as that. Well, I do not know your country and neither do I know your locality even if we are in the same country but one thing that is certain in my country is that no matter how bad the locality is, you can't wear your school uniform to gamble, except in some few cases where the situation of the neighbourhood is very bad. There are also a few instances where the parent or a senior person send the student to play for them. However, it is so irresponsible of the gambling agency to allow such students or known underage to gamble. The agents should be arrested and tried in a court of law to be a deterrent to others. Other than this, you will not hear of such in my country and many people will even frown at it. Now considering how it is in my country in the worst-case scenario, you can see that it is even minimal to warrant the importance you are laying on it. |
|
|
|
Hahaha...I am just seeing this now, well, Changpeng Zhao has already been sentenced already, but I must say that I am not satisfied with the jail term handed to him. All of you who expected that one of the richest persons in thr world (who also pleaded guilty) will gte a long term sentence over something like this is extremely naive. Tbh, I am surprised that he even got those 4 months, let alone 3 years as demanded by prosecution. There is no naivety here but a preaching of justice, and a show of the fact that the justice system is bad, at least in some cases like this. If a huge money could be laundered where terrorists, drug barons, and child and human traffickers are the end gainers, and the pusher of the money was caught and has such a reduced sentence. Such would never sit down well with someone like me, I don't know of you. He should have even been forgiven with no jail term since that is what you seem to want. The 4-month jail term handed to him is too little and I think that regardless of whether he pleaded guilty or not, the 36 months (3 years) was supposed to be a more appropriate sentence in my opinion to be a deterrent for others like him. Do you honestly believe that even 3 years in prison would be a real deterrent for someone not to engage in money laundering that can bring him billions of dollars? Yes, it will be a deterrent for them. Maybe you should do the calculation of the 4 months they slammed on him x 10 + an extra 2 years or thereabout. If he spends a minimum of such in jail with hard labour at the same time, can you compare it with the luxuries of his home and the social life he would miss? Of course, he can't be kept in jail forever, but one punishment outweighs the other, and hence the deterrence. They will continue the money laundry and illegal acts simply because they have money. This is also the reason why I keep asking myself whether the law is for the poor alone as the rich due to the money they have and their status in society always find their way around it to either escape justice or be served a minimal one.
Age old question, and there are plenty of outliers with the small guy winning for once, but the law, as long as it's politicised (which it is), can only favour the status quo. Of course, we get upheavals where the letter of the law crumbles and the status quo is replaced in bloody fashion, but the cycle only renews then. We're all trying to be part of that, at least I realise it =D That's a very good one...The justice and equity preached are not equal. That's the world we live in. |
|
|
|
As you said, if the casino is such that restrict our country, we should not play smart but abide by it. After all, such a casino is not the only caisno in the universe. But what I will like to add in this regard is that even if the casino claims they allow the use of VPN, still do not use it. Out of experience, many gamblers are not victim of the multiple account allegations, but some are mere victim of the use of the free and cheap VPNs. Once the VPN is not allocated to you personally, anything can happen. But the sadest part is that casinos will not even investigate it but label the gambler a cheater so that they can steal his money.
In this type of things sometimes it is not what you think, in 2017 there was no KYC, you could play with VPN and there was no problem, because the casino cares that the player enters and plays, deposits and plays nothing more, in fact For any problem the system assigns an ID which is a way of identifying everything so that it can do things well and they can solve the problems, so in this order of ideas the things that can come out now are a series of advantages that they wanted to sell us, the VPN is to be able to access any site bypassing government prohibitions, so for me that is not bad, I believe that everyone deserves to access sites regardless of geographical area. I think you are missing the point here and it is not about the time the KYC started being enforced, it is about the mode of enforcement and usage of it which could be misleading, overbearing and selfish at times. Also, I know all the points you stated above and no one is denying the fact that VPN can be used by the residents of countries where a certain casino or website has been restricted by the IP so long as the use of VPN is allowed by the website itself. But my main point is that there are risks as well, which many may not be looking towards but can still put them in trouble, and as a matter of fact, it's constantly putting them in trouble. For those who are smart about it, the casino could discover that the customers use VPN and use it against them, guilty or not. This is why I entirely preached against the use of VPNs in casinos. We've seen enough cases on this forum where the casinos will always be alleging the use of VPN or multiple accounts while the gambler will continue to swear it was not true, I feel for these guys, so what do you expect? I am a smart person and I think the smartest way to go about this is to use your local IP, and if a casino is not allowing your country, just skip them and move to another to avoid the VPN usage and VPN-caused multiple accounts detection, which in many cases can't be true but a way for the casino to do their thing against the gambler. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is the dumbest thing ever invented.
If you think Bitcoin is dumb then why you're present on this forum? If you don't like the idea of Bitcoin and find it useless then I believe someone like you should not be part of the forum that's a place for Bitcoin community. You need some research I believe, no I think you may need some treatment so you can understand Bitcoin properly. For me I think he is just a troll that needs people to actually notice him just like the other fella who always shares post about how he is the original Satoshi Nakamoto and the owner of the forum. Sometimes when I see post like this, ignoring them is probably the best thing but with that being said how can someone even think of uttering such nonsense that Bitcoin is the dumbest thing created, well it's simple if you like being a financial slave to the system then you are free to go but other who don't know the importance of BTC. How is investing in something that people need being a slave, but investing in something no one needs being free? If I invest in dollars I hold something that masses of people need for paying off debt owed to banks. I am the master, not the slave. On the other hand, if you traded dollars for Bitcoin you are the slave because you need other people to invest and buy your Bitcoin otherwise you cannot get your dollars back. It's hilarious how you Bitcoin evangelists think that you're the masters while in reality you're the slaves. Let me say that I appreciate your wisdom and insightfulness about words from the main OP and your subsequent replies. Many take the ideology of Bitcoin to the extreme even though it is not perfect and I think I am one of the few who tells some facts about it here since I've been in the world of investment before the crypto era, unlike many of them who's eyes are just being opened to investment due to cryptocurrency. But from the main OP, your narration was not without faults but I still say that I give you 85%, you are indeed a thinker. Well, you might be wondering why the denial of the remaining 15%, it's because (though risky) whether physical or virtual, anything could be related and referred to as an asset. All the things that are being labelled assets today are because of the importance/relevance people place on them, and whether virtual or not, once people appreciate it to the point of investing and holding their money in it, they are assets and valuable, which is also applicable to Bitcoin in this context. That said, Bitcoin as an asset can do almost everything that fiat money can do as well, all you need to do is to convert it one way or the other and the debt, loan, and mortgage as you cited them in the main OP will all be paid. Obligations can be fulfilled with Bitcoin, for real! About the bonds and other collateralized arrangements/agreements, what is happening in the crypto space is not any different, only that it is not so popular in governance and since many centralised systems have nothing to do with cryptocurrency but fiats, the popularity of such arrangements/agreements, and dependency in such can't be as though you are dealing with the fiat currencies like the USD. Lastly, I give you 100% in this current OP, and my reason is simple, I 100% agree with you (in summary) that the fiat can do without Bitcoin but Bitcoin can't do without fiat which makes the fiat the master regardless of whatever anyone interprets to it. I've always indicated this even as some always preach Bitcoin as the supreme of them all. Let's be realistic! But the whole point is that Bitcoin is not an asset. -snip- I disagree with you in its strong terms to the point that I didn't even bother to read the rest of what you wrote. Bitcoin is an asset and nothing will change that. I've lived in the world of financial markets, payments and settlements long enough to know the difference in this regard. It is so plain and obvious but I wonder why you have not seen it. Maybe you should do your independent research about it and not rely on your wisdom alone. Even Investopedia called Bitcoin an asset among other renowned business, trading and investment websites/outlets. There is no controversy here as Bitcoin is a virtual/digital asset, this is unless you do not even know what asset means. Fine, Bitcoin might be guilty of some of what you narrated in the main OP, but certainly, it's an asset. If it is not an asset, why are people buying and holding it? Don't you know that anything you invest your money in is an asset? For short, an asset is a store of value and Bitcoin perfectly fits into that fact/narration without mincing words. For it to be a "digital" asset doesn't make it less of an asset. The world is revolving and it's high time you accept this easy fact. This is like saying that an empty box is an asset. No, that what is inside the box, that what the box holds is an asset. Bitcoin box holds nothing. So there's no asset in the Bitcoin system. But understandably, people like to believe the opposite. If someone spend $70K on an empty box they obviously won't admit they bought nothing. They would say that they bought an asset. A digital gold. A precious intangible commodity. Whatever. It's a Freudian defence mechanism. I think I know where your confusion is coming from, you just do not want to accept that there is a virtual or digital asset simply because they are not what you can see with your eyes physically, but you are so wrong. First, I would like you to perish the idea that you will have to be able to touch something valuable before you can label it an asset. Ordinary papers and drawings that were worthless before are being sold for millions of dollars today, this is not because they suddenly became gold or diamond, but because people place relevance/importance on it. Take for instance the Monalisa paint, it is worth a fortune ($100m in 1962, and now over a billion dollars), but do you think the material used to paint it is worth up to $100? Nevertheless, it's being sold for millions of dollars, why? It's simple, people place a relevance on it, which makes it an asset. This principle is what stocks and even bank cheques and notes/bonds work with. There are values placed on them because liquidity is backing them up. Also, do not think that the operations of the companies you buy their stocks is the worth of the stocks and the company itself, no, people are buying stocks of companies without having anything to do with the company in any way, and that keeps adding value to the company to the point that people can fulfil financial obligations with stocks (virtual/digital). Asset is all about people's money, and nothing more. The same goes for Bitcoin which has a market capitalization of over $1T, this is huge and many physical assets do not even have up to that and they exist as assets. Today, you may buy your Lamborgini and tell the seller you will clear the bills with a certain amount of Bitcoin. Can a valueless entity as you claim do that? Only an asset can do that just like bonds, cheques and other financial settlement means do. It is you who needs to change your orientation about the virtual/digital assets, for them to have been created empty doesn't mean they will remain empty. The moment people are moving money in to back it up and place importance on it, it becomes an asset. Besides, anything you trade in the financial market is an ASSET. Thankfully, Bitcoin is one of them. |
|
|
|
Btc price has dip below 60k, and most investors who may be wondering when best to buy the dip I think now is the time to buy the dip. it may not dip below this anymore. I know it fell to $56k but I urge people to buy more now before it rise again.
Thank you for this and judging by the time of the creation of this topic with what Bitcoin is doing now, I would say that you had it coming. It's a well-known fact that Bitcoin seldom moves below $60,000, not to mention the fact that it almost hit $56,000 in the last bearish correction. Any time it moves below the level and also has the opportunity to show some bullish pattern is the right time to buy indeed. This time, it was the FOMC meeting minutes of last week that helped it before the many news of Friday added to it. Regardless, Bitcoin is moving higher and higher and sitting above the $60,000 psychological level means a whole lot to the coin and its investors. This may attract a more positive outlook to it for the time being. Although there are many hurdles to be faced by the coin on the bullish path even as I am sure it will indeed struggle to get to its current ATH. Let's see how things unfold, but if it can't breach $67,629 upwards, it could become another issue for it. |
|
|
|
|
A question like this has been raised many times in the past even before the crypto era and only three answers keep winning over and over again. Even the centralised financial systems and services are also applicable in this regard. However, to summarize it and without mincing words, the following three points should be considered as where your money will go in this kind of situation.
1. If your casino is duly registered and regulated, and is sincere with integrity, such money would be disclosed to the authority after a certain duration of time (grace time). This could take months, if not years to give time for you to reclaim the money with legitimate means/proofs. How the casino and the authority will deal with the money now depends on the two of them.
2. Some casinos will do partial revelation. They will reveal some cases and cover the others. And since it is their system we are talking about, it will be easier for them to do so.
3. For the last set, they will try as much as possible to keep the whole money for themselves whether you like it or not, no revelation whatsoever. This is especially if the regulation tying them is very weak.
|
|
|
|
While you are scared, El Salvador keeps buying the dip every day.
it seems like El Salvador is taking advantage of the current market conditions and adding to their Bitcoin holdings. As of now, they own 5,700 Bitcoin, which is quite a significant amount. It's an interesting strategy and shows their confidence in the long-term potential of cryptocurrency.
anyways for now i'm happy about the halving and will be celebrating it with the Halving carnival Bitget exchange is organizing, who knows if i can win some free bucks and buy bitcoin too
what are your thoughts on this Anon ?
For me, we should not compare a personal treasury with a state treasury, the impact or the attachment on the player varies as one is a personal resource, while the other is a commonwealth, which was just entrusted in his care. President Nayib Bukele has made more name for himself with Bitcoin adoption and subsequent engagements, but don't you think he is taking too many risks, and perhaps gambling with the national resources? After the ones bought before 2024, I expected a good futuristic person to wait and carefully study the context of "Bitcoin" itself. Many may appraise him or even idolise him for what he is doing, but I don't. All I know is that he is gambling too much with the national wealth and it is an ugly act in all senses, he should give more time to study Bitcoin. Fine, Bitcoin is a very good project and I love the way he made it a legal tender in his country, but a cautious and conservative approach is the best in all investments in case things do not work as planned. The fact that the money used in buying it is public funds and not personal is more reason why I advise people to be cautious in following his footsteps contrary to what you want them to do. |
|
|
|
Hahaha...I am just seeing this now, well, Changpeng Zhao has already been sentenced already, but I must say that I am not satisfied with the jail term handed to him. The 4-month jail term handed to him is too little and I think that regardless of whether he pleaded guilty or not, the 36 months (3 years) was supposed to be a more appropriate sentence in my opinion to be a deterrent for others like him. Before you close and open back your eyes the 4 months are over, this will never teach these rich guys any lesson. They will continue the money laundry and illegal acts simply because they have money. This is also the reason why I keep asking myself whether the law is for the poor alone as the rich due to the money they have and their status in society always find their way around it to either escape justice or be served a minimal one. |
|
|
|
Even if such thing exist, I have no idea how the casino consider players as addicted because I think it is hard thing to know. Casino may notice a behavior change of the player indeed based on the deposit/wager activity but I dont think casino will close the account immediately one the casino notice it.
I don't recall seeing other businesses do something similar to that too. An exchange for example won't suddenly close your account just because you made a ton of deposits, maybe they will ask for KYC but they sure as hell love more deposits from us. Trying to be a police for something else is just a waste of time for them IMO. Unless the law specifically asks them to do so, they won't do anything about it. They have no moral obligation to do that anyway, and the players need to look after themselves to begin with. You have many things said over there to the point that I began to get confused on which one to reply to as they seem not necessarily related. Notwithstanding, the way gambling is being related to and engaged with is not the same as trading and investment, and if you are sincere, how many traders/investors have you seen so addicted to them to the point that it becomes a serious issue that calls for either internal or external help to get them cured? That is why we should not relate them together and the more reason why brokers, exchanges etc are less concerned about this, and even the government. If a trader and investors are losing so much, they always caution themselves and it is so easy. This is unlike gambling which is tempting and addictive on its own. As for the KYC completion, I do not think that any standard and well-regulated brokers and exchanges are so relaxed to the point that they will allow you to be trading for so long without completing them, No. If it were to be with exchanges of before, fine, you might cite some examples, but when it comes to standard, reputation and regulation, you will hardly see one today. It got more strict with the brokers, you will never be able to withdraw a dime from your account without completing your KYC, that's how stringent it is. Lastly, the policing remark is not just appropriate in my opinion as the government and good casinos are only finding ways to help the addicts one way or the other. And to always encourage a sane society, I do not think it's too much if such is considered for special cases. |
|
|
|
Online casino game is very popular day by day. Many people are involved in online casinos. It is too hard to find a trusted casino. The scam is a big problem nowadays, If you select the wrong project or casino you will lose your all capital. So you should look at their customer satisfaction rate I think 90 to 95 five is good for trust. So many casinos bring e-deposit bonuses and free spins for their new players. But every day free spin is quite tough. Trusted and well-reputed casinos should not provide everyday free spin. So it is very important to keep your capital safe you should play a trusted casino.
their is a trusted casino everywhere most especially those casino that have a compulsory kyc verification It would be very mistaken to say that because a casino asked you for a KYC then they are trustworthy, that is just so inaccurate. KYC is just a procedure and if any casinos ask you for it is not the yardstick to know their reputation and integrity, they could even be worse than the casinos that do not ask people for such. Don't you think that many casinos these days that are very bad could be hiding under the pretence of the KYC for people to mistake it for genuine? That is why we have to be very careful to which company we are taking our money to. Trust grows and the only way we can trust any casino is to first do the research about them through reviews and many other ways we can think of. We may further verify their details, registration and licence number, which includes their regulation. After which we may start depositing our money bit by bit, but we should never trust casinos because they have the best look and try to be reputable. Let them prove it. However, big and popular names are the ways to go forward here to make the journey of finding the best casinos faster. |
|
|
|
I thought the forum have a rule stating that it shouldn't be used, take a look at how campaign are having these bonus of a thing, I really can't remember the manager but they do give bonus for best post, don't you think most of them do use AI to advance their post.
@Jessie2121, on this forum there are too many smart people and you can not outsmart everyone while using AI to make post, if you do that frequently, you will definitely be caught and yoy will receive a red trust. What you are saying about wining bonus with AI post is just a false because no body will make post consistently with AI without being unnoticed. I haven't seen anyone who was given a red tag because they made use of AI; rather, what they have been given as a warning is neutral to warn others of their involvement in AI usage. Aside from the neutral, it seems there have also been some adjustments to the forum rules because I have seen users getting temporary bans due to AI usage and some permanent bans too, of which I don't know the length or gravity that is used to decide their punishment. Regarding the red or neutral flag, well, it's obvious that it's what you've not seen as you said, so I should not go there, especially for the reason that I have not also seen it. But I doubt it if there won't be such cases, particularly if the detection is 100% when software is being used to ascertain it. But as you said, I am sure that many would have been banned due to the use of AI. Do you know why? Though, we may not be investigating each case, nevertheless, what is important here is that there is no way you can be using AI to generate your posts and not plagiarise, and plagiarism is seriously frowned upon on the forum. This invariably means that many would have been flagged to have warned them and later got banned for such an offence if they were warned but didn't turn a new leaf. As for the extent of the punishment, I don't think there is a lesser punishment than permanent banning in this situation unless such a person later begs or appeal somehow. |
|
|
|
No. Withdrawal will be in the cryptocurrencies. But it will be recounted in the USD or local currency for tax services. As the result gamblers have an opportunity to use cryptocurrency without conversion, the casino don`t cares about it and when the gambler withdraw his money - the casino get result for tax services. If they need difference between deposit and withdraw - it is possible to count twice: during the deposit and during withdrawal. And nobody cares how price changes between these counting.
Now I fully understand. All my thoughts were that you guys were referring to the dealing between the gambler and the casinos only, and the way some casinos could make their deposit and withdrawal flexible for customers made me think that way, needless to say also that it is also happening elsewhere, at least it is happening in the world of trading and investment. However, for the tax payment, it is a very good bargain for the casino to be paying according to the agreement with the country they domiciled, anything other than this could lead to sanction. How many countries of the world would even collect cryptocurrency from you in this current dispensation? Except for a few that are now focusing their beam on a thing like that for investment purposes. And I think El Salvador will be an exception though since such is a legal tender in the country. But the rest of the countries of the world, or should I say the majority, they will frown at that as they may only regulate your cryptocurrency activity but when it comes to payments, they either accept the hard currency like the USD or their local currency that they are used with. The problem is that even in countries, where it is possible to use cryptocurrencies, you have to pay taxes in local currency. And if you use BTC, you have to convert it to the currency that tax service can calculate. And if you convert it for gamblers - they would be disappointed if BTC will grow up. So, i think that it is the only decision, when everybody will be satisfied. Of course, I understand the plight of the government in those countries, cryptocurrency is not such that is direct in payments and settlements as fiats currencies, so it is better that they only opt for the fiat currency for tax payments, especially in their local currency if the country is not multinational. Even if such is multinational, the end-exchange to the local currency is important to avoid more stress for the government. Also, I would like you to know that countries could allow cryptocurrency but still not a legal tender in their country. For those countries, you can't ever pay the government's tax due with cryptocurrency, you will have to pay with fiat currency depending on your agreement (local or foreign). But for the countries that have made Bitcoin a legal tender like El Salvador, I believe they should allow such an opportunity in tax payments as well, unless they are not practising what they preach which will be so bad. It should be optional in this regard at the convenience of the country in question. As for the conversion for their customers, they do not have any right to do that, and in my opinion, they are even breaking the AML law. By doing that, they make it more difficult for auditors and investigators to locate, and I believe it is better they even send back withdrawals the way money was deposited into the customer's account. |
|
|
|
I don't like the locked Reputation topics, but I don't think it's worth changing the rules. Scammers have been using locked threads on the Marketplace boards for years, and the rules didn't change. I'd argue scammers are worse than someone hurting someone else's feelings.
I quite understand the school of thought you are bringing this from, but at the same time, we should canvass for equity and affairs for all. The suggestion will also stop the dire need to keep opening new threads for the same purpose just for defence or counterattack. The fact that scammers are doing worse should not be taken as the basis to overlook what is not good just as it is also been overlooked in some other aspects of the forum where rules are supposed to be adjusted for obvious reasons. Unless what the OP alleged is good, I believe changing rules to address it is important. |
|
|
|
I recommend checking out Rocky token associated with Metawin which has grown well over time. You will not choose from the top-rated ones and even those ones that are listed below it? Why? Well, I see sense in choosing these three if the person indeed wants to invest in gambling coins, after all, the RLB is the leader among all of them, and as Bitcoin is the leader in the cryptocurrency world, it is always moving gainfully in terms of the capital inflow than others. The same was what I noticed with the RLB itself.
He clearly specified that he wasn't earning much from some of the ones that he held onto which is why he isn't interested in top rated ones. This is the general consensus since gambling tokens don't really perform well in the long-term. Oh, Rocky token, I will put my eyes on that. But at the same time, what is confusing me here are many. The first is that I can't actually decipher the correct meaning of the word "associated" as used here, as it could mean different things. Is it their direct coin, an affiliation or does the project owner just have a link with the casino in other ways? The other one is that there are other METAWIN tokens like MTN tokens and META tokens according to my research. I am a bit confused now, and a small enlightenment could be useful even as I wait for @AmoreJaz to furnish me with his preferred tokens as seen in my last reply to ascertain his preference(s). I also quite understand his plight on those listed tokens, it is a general plight as we all expect so much in cryptocurrency. Nevertheless, RLB has made significant movements in the past if I must say, and just like any coins and tokens, they have their time and season, and the future is still promising in my opinion. |
|
|
|
As you said, if the casino is such that restrict our country, we should not play smart but abide by it. After all, such a casino is not the only caisno in the universe.
Unfortunately when gambling is illegal in your country, most of the top casinos would also comply and will not cater your country. maybe there are some out there that will cater, but you have a pause for a while and question their reputation as there are only few license provider in the industry and most of them have a similar rules. That's why some people are using VPN to gamble, but it's cheating, so they have to be aware of the consequences but if they accept the risk and possible consequences, then that's really up to them, what they just like is to enjoy in any available ways. I am aware of what you replied with but it is a bit different from what I stated above. This is not the case of the country of the gambler disallowing him to gamble but the case of the casino restricting the citizen of a certain country from gambling on their platforms. They are two different things. This means that gambling is not illegal in the country of the person, other casinos are doing just fine there, but some casinos are not just allowing them to gamble due to restriction rules. This is common today for many reasons which could include the regulation and cooperation of the countries in which the casinos are domiciled and the gambler lives in, their relationship may not be cordial in gambling regards. Many other reasons must have caused it as well, which is like the prevention of capital flight through that, and many more. |
|
|
|
There is no doubt about that, I personally could say that things can be very usable in terms of those who can put them to use, I know that in many cases corrupt rulers and people who have always done evil to the world have done so with fiat money, we cannot blame the fiat money for the crimes of some people, so sometimes seeing that they say that they have been robbed and that they have done things to be able to establish themselves better in terms of crypto, well it doesn't make much sense to me that they think Thanks to crypto, more thefts can be made these days, all of these are simply tools.
The things that are referred to crypto, the people who hate them invent all kinds of excuses to make them look bad, then based on anonymity and all this that they want to remove, well they simply want to remove it so that everything is exposed, and Those who use crypto, casinos and all this may be exposed.
There have always been alot of misconceptions and propaganda again cryptocurrency and bitcoin most especially which is why we see alot of attacks from various government a and some of it agencies around the world, even though all the criminal who use the fiat monetary process have been left unchecked and uncaught until now, but their are quick to sponsor hate statements against the industry today. The government have failed in to act right to regulate the financial institutions, and also making a misplaced priority by chasing the wrong fight. You can't certainly blame the government in this regard, cryptocurrency caught them unawares, so getting used to it will take time. You can't also blame them as some speak against it while others either ban, restrict or advocate/enforce strict regulation, it wasn't the same reaction by all which indicates Hope. What they've always known was fiat which is a centralised system and is what they somewhat trusted because they still have control over it despite some illicit flows. As for the illicit flows, criminals and money launderers continue to find means to outsmart the government even as the government continues to block some and unveil some perpetrator's schemes and even jail many of them. This has been the tough task the government was fighting and still fighting before and after the introduction of cryptocurrency. Now that cryptocurrency was introduced, it became an added headache for them for obvious reasons, and if you were the top leader in the government, would you feel differently if you were genuine? As we know, it takes harder tasks to solve the puzzles of cryptocurrencies than fiats, and the common claims that criminals are using fiats are not even a contention here because the government will never deny that. But it seems people continue to reference it which is supposed not to be so because the primary concern of any responsible government is to build and maintain a sane system where illicit flows will not happen talkless of causing the financing of terrorism, trafficking and others. The only way they can do this is to get better control of cryptocurrency which is what they're trying to do these days through various regulations, and this is for the good of all as decentralisation will always come with its danger whether we like it or not. There is a dual effect on bitcoin holdings and crypto that is difficult to remove. On one side you are using it because it attracks a certain kind of use that uses crypto to play over and over and sometime they might be linked with crime. However the effect also plays against in the sense of the seriousness and credibility of the flows and that is the con to the pro. This is normal and the mind of an average human being will always be selfish. The law and the regulations all around the world and the crypto space are keeping the check to a little extent, if not, it will be worse. Now, the cryptocurrency has the flaws of its own to aid and abate enough illegal inflow and outflow, don't you think that the people will be using the opportunity to perpetrate their evil deeds? For many years now, scammers have changed to crypto for their illegal dealings, and they talk of more illegality in movies in the constructive approach in which they plan it with cryptocurrency and it is more popular now than fiat. Aside from the movies associated with bank robberies, it is cryptocurrency you will be hearing when it comes to illegal flows. That alone should ring a huge bell in the head of any right-thinking person that this industry needs more regulation. It is such an industry that was created with the intention of making the government have no say, but now, with its loose ends, the government is making improvements in doing its best for the sanity of the world, which I am 100% in support of. Or else, it becomes worse issues over time if such menace is not checked now. Regulation is the key, and I implore strict regulation still, after all, if anyone has nothing to hide, there can't be fear. The fear of what? So long as cryptocurrency is legal in your country, then leave the government alone to do what they need to do. That's my advice for everyone, by the way. |
|
|
|
The promising approach about the rising of Bitcoin price seemly to have emotional influence on investors which at some points triggers market sentiments.
Who has observed that the speculations and predictions of Bitcoin price has gone silence since the market went DIP after the halving?
What you just pointed out is what I term the lousy nature of many Bitcoin investors and speculators, I've never given it a thought because I know their type. It didn't just start today, it has started the very time Bitcoin has started gaining prominence. These guys can simply be called gamblers, and since many of them predict the price of Bitcoin when it appreciates upward, it is often easy for them to be correct, especially when the asset is in a strong bullish trend. Nonetheless, they are guessing on instincts and they are mostly wrong when they are either outrageous in their prediction or they predict the market when it is either stuck at a point or is in a bearish trend. And now that their expectation is not working pretty fast, they keep mute and get discouraged. Wait till the Bitcoin price is moving higher, especially if it can breach and hold above $75,000, they will suddenly come out of their hiding and start running their mouths once again. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
