There are certain moods that would affect my choice but overall I think I prefer table games than slots. The interaction, the competition, the challenge against other people is definitely more fun.

There are times when you feel like being alone, though, focused on something fun and fast-paced to somehow distract your mind away from certain stuff. In times like that, slots would be the way to go. But, as you've noted, your money is fast draining there.

I think I'd make more money and have real fun without noticing the hours passing by when I'm playing blackjack, baccarat, or poker.

I wonder where this prejudice is coming from. Your thoughts do not only exude skepticism; they seem to show some signs of antagonism.

I personally consider this a step forward. The disadvantage with Bitcoin or crypto in general is that it doesn't have a body which could formally push at least for its acknowledgment in the regulating or policy-making bodies. These are not companies which could hire PR staff and lobbyists and whatnots to educate or to clear some air of doubt or misinformation.

I know that the members of this council do not directly care about individuals. They care about Bitcoin or crypto primarily because they have vested interest. However, I still believe that the success of this council will also be considered the success of crypto itself and its community. You need not worry about control. What they are representing is decentralization, something they themselves cannot control. Even together as one, they cannot control Bitcoin.

I'm personally more excited to hear news such as this compared to news that this and that wealthy company is buying millions worth of Bitcoin, although the latter may influence the price more. They're both good news, of course, but I guess the former makes the argument for Bitcoin more as a currency or a payment alternative, which is what Bitcoin was originally envisioned, than an asset, store of value, or pure investment.

There are as many investment options as there are gambling games. The risks vary. There are investments with low, medium, and high risk but the higher the risk the higher the potential profit. The same goes with gambling.


I agree with this. While you can bet on something which could be settled months or even years later, gambling is still generally short-term.
 

Again, it depends. There are investments with high risk. On the other hand, there are also gambling with low risk.


As investment risk varies, the safety of capital also varies. But it is up to you to invest with a low-risk or a high-risk. As with gambling, making money should never be a motive.

---

If I were to summarize the difference between investing and gambling, I'd say gambling is the opposite of investing. Investing is done to make money while gambling is done to lose it.  

You mentioned "good investment platform" three times. What is its significance? You are like doing a short SEO article here.

Anyway, when we speak of investment it doesn't have to have a platform. Among ordinary working-class citizens who can only afford to save so much, many are investing in jewelries based on precious metals, real estate, small businesses, small farms, and so on. In these investments, you don't need to have a platform.

More often than not, investment is closely associated with stocks, bonds, and so on. The majority doesn't get into it in real life.

You are only making things a lot more complicated I'm afraid.

I suggest that you just find someone within your country who is interested to buy Bitcoin. Choose cash if you wish to avoid the scrutinizing eyes of the banks and that's it.

But if you have a legitimate business or a regular job, you don't have to worry about making deposits to your bank accounts even if some of the funds are actually cryptocurrency proceeds. Just don't make deposits huge enough that they could raise certain suspicions from them.

Now, let's wait for the 29th of May and see where our money goes.

Anyway, I don't have a problem that Haney is ahead in the betting odds. That's reasonable enough. He's the young rising star, after all; the promising one. But I have some issues with how high it is that I am tempted to just risk my little amount to Linares, the only man who fell Loma. The man has not completely faded. I believe he's still got it in him. +450 for him is enticing enough.

I believe this is founded upon a wrong premise. There is something terribly wrong with this. There is no race to the bottom among countries here. There is only a race to the bottom between the US and time.

If I may interpret this, I would say the US, more than the rest, is now being seriously threatened that other countries have more to offer in terms of corporate tax incentives and benefits that huge companies are enticed to let go of the US and start operating somewhere overseas.

To me, this is an attempt of the US to stifle global competition between countries at least as far as corporate tax rates are concerned. Why should other countries, especially the much poorer ones, fall for this trap when, in the first place, they are setting low corporate tax rates in order to attract foreign investors?


Last I heard Puerto Rico is still part of the United States.

It is more possible for small retail stores and individual sellers to accept Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as payment in China than in this huge Canton Fair. Not to mention that this bi-annual trade fair is brought in large part by the Chinese government.

I'm sure agreements and eventually contracts originating from this export and import trade fair are going to be amounting to the millions and all will be settled through banks and therefore fiat.

Of course, there must be more banks in the world than cryptocurrencies. Banks have been here for quite a while. Cryptocurrencies, on the other hand, have just started to rise in number recently. Many of which have already been abandoned for lack of success or support. Banks are a business so they are expected to multiply. Cryptocurrency is not.

More banks does not mean more money. Well, more money for those who are running the banks, of course, but not money for the people. Banks are money-making tools for the elite. But it does not help much the ordinary people which comprise the majority of the population.

I'm thinking that my money would go for Linares. An old man, yes, 13 years Haney's senior as a matter of fact, but I think he's still got the power in him. He's past his prime, no doubt about it, but so is Haney not yet thoroughly tested inside the ring. He's got a UD against the older and fading Yuriorkis. So I wouldn't consider it a test in his career.

This is going to be Haney's most challenging fight so far in his entire career. That's why with odds of 1/8 or at least -800 as per bet365, I think that's too high and simply not worth it. Linares' 9/2 or +450 seems more interesting to me.

I understand that crypto scam victims may exploit all means available, which may include your platform, for them to try to recover their lost funds, especially if the amount is considered life-changing. However, on the part of crypto lawyers or law firms on your platform, are they charging fees as they deem fair? If not, under what specific incentives would they be encouraged to extend help to the victims? If yes, why would I be using your platform, which is an unnecessary layer in this respect, when I could directly consult a lawyer myself?

I can neither agree nor disagree as I am not reading any kind of analysis or explanation supporting such predictions. There are only prices on it. Moreover, I also don't make an analysis myself to somehow come up with a Bitcoin price prediction, so I cannot even make a comparison.

However, I certainly think it is very possible. The all time high was just around $62,000 which was reached in the first quarter of the year. There are still 3 quarters left within the year. That's 9 months all in all. The price of Bitcoin could easily double within such time frame.

Finally, Bitcoin's price at the end of the year 2021 at around $114,000 is in fact in congruence with other predictions such as PlanB's S2F or JPMorgan's. As a matter of fact, it is much milder or conservative as compared to Citibank or Guggenheim or PlanB's S2FX.

Microstrategy just doesn't stop stacking Bitcoin. And now it has almost a hundred thousand BTC in its portfolio. I hope the latest Bitcoin bought by Microstrategy wasn't coming from some retail Bitcoin owners who decided to sell because they already made some decent profit. I'm a bit worried that one day Bitcoin will only be focused among billionaire institutions.

Anyway, I wish Microstrategy would also start accepting Bitcoin as payment from their customers which include huge names such as Pfizer.

I really appreciate such kind of program or option within the gambling industry. I wish this will be emulated by other countries and even gambling sites and real world casinos. It would be great if this kind of initiative would become mainstream.

The havoc that gambling addiction may bring to people is unimaginable. It may cost them all the precious things in life or even life itself.

To those whose addiction to gambling needs a little more serious attention from the professionals, this may not really stop them from finding a way to continue gambling, but to those who have just noticed some early signs of addiction or have suffered too much of a loss and wanted to stop, this will really help them.

Hey, welcome! The forum's vast. Spend some time to explore. Sooner or later, you'd be amazed at how wide and rich it is. You'll surely have fun reading, following certain topics, learning, joining discussions, dropping some questions, and probably even earning some Sats later on.

It might be hard for you today to specifically mention something you really want to deeply focus on since you're just new here. It might be developed soon while exploring and learning. You might end up specifically interested in trading, gambling, Bitcoin, development, altcoins, economics, and so on.

You seem to have taken it personally.

When you placed your bet on your team, you must be aware that they could either win or lose. That's it. If they win, you are good. But if they lose, it's all good just the same. It was a possibility right from the start, after all.

Your team was not giving you hope. You were the one who hoped because your money is at stake.

I'm not siding with STEX exchange. I haven't heard of it. It may be a scam exchange or not, but my point is that if you are not planning to trade for the next several months, there is no reason for your funds to stay on exchanges.

It is questionable for any exchange for that matter to simply declare an exchange account as abandoned simply because the owner hasn't accessed it for months. It could be interpreted as a sneaky stipulation in their ToS, or even an attempt by them to just confiscate the funds for no other reason than wanting them.

First and foremost, trading cryptocurrency is never "very simple and easy."

Moreover, beginners should not even get involved with leverage trading. They're beginners. Leverage trading is not for beginners.

Spot trading is the easiest way to trade and beginners should start somewhere easy, so 12-13 spot trading pairs are too few. Which makes me ask, why should I choose your platform over others which are more popular and have more than a hundred tokens and hundreds of pairs?

All this won't stop Bitcoin.

1. Wall Street may attempt, and perhaps even succeed to a certain extent, to pump and dump the price if it is moving as one and has billions and billions to play with the market, but that does not amount to stopping Bitcoin.

2. Bitcoin Cash and other forks are nuisance. Don't even bother with their existence.

3. Government bans won't even ban the use of Bitcoin among its citizens.

4. Hacks have been happening; Bitcoin is still here.