8. Ultimately, the decision-making process still relies on the community. Most of the changes proposed on the code or the protocol are made public in order for the community to discuss and put their thoughts into it. Other changes in the code that are not really announced are very minor, oftentimes just optimization or improvements on the existing code. If major changes on the code or protocol is only controlled by a select few, bitcoin wouldn't be bitcoin as the changes are then only controlled by a few heads and not the whole network and community.

Some are paid and some are volunteers for the community, especially on those casinos that only opened recently. I personally knew 3 chat moderators on different gambling platforms before and all of them are paid, although not in an amount that is really livable considering that they are not required to be on the chat rooms at all times. Plus they are also given free credits on the casino on top of what they are already being paid for. IMO it's already a nice incentive if you are someone who spends much of their time on the casinos, and it also help you enhance your social skills too.

It's crazy how this happens in just a short span of time, but being with crypto for almost a decade now, this no longer surprise me. A lot of new people are still coming into crypto every single day, and that certainly adds to the overall $$$ that is being put into the market. There's still a huge potential left for the cryptomarket to boom even further considering that people, together with large companies, are still coming in and placing their money on bitcoin and crypto.

Ethereum still has a lot of room for pumps as I see it. Volumes are still insanely high across all exchanges, and the fact that the crypto received an update that is gearing EIP-1559 deployment makes people think that this project is still a pretty viable one, and still for the long run too.

At this point in time, FOMO helps move the price towards new heights, and I doubt that the run will be over just yet as people still have money to blow and the hype isn't over yet.

It's very risky, almost as if it's a leap of faith. You can't really tell if it'll work or not because El Salvador is honestly just a testing ground for bitcoin and if its possible to helped developing countries. So far it's working okay-ish, though still far from the success that everyone is expecting off it, it's still something to be had. I'm just keen to know which direction should El Salvador take this if it proved helpful on its usage of bitcoin on its coastal communities and tourist spots.

We've been having chariot races, wrestling, gladiator fights, and basically any other fighting competitions for over a millennium. Why then, would a relatively 'safe' and controlled sport be something morally wrong? Boxing isn't a competition aimed to kill one opponent in order to score a victory, but rather to showcase how you handle a bout inside a ring using your fists. The goal is to score enough points throughout the match to win, and not to leave your opponent beaten as a pulp. While it is true that it happens, but still, for the most part, scores decide who wins the match.

Every sport has risks laid bare on the players, not just boxing. And with your logic, shouldn't every physical sport be morally wrong and therefore outlawed?

Definitely bullish in the current term. I don't see any potential slowdowns save for one really bad news that could send people panicking in fear of an immediate crash (bans, anyone?). Moreover, volumes across exchanges are also increasing, signifying that more market activity is to be expected, and that traders are already done with their 2-month long slumber. Then again, one can never be sure with the movements of crypto, especially bitcoin that has undergone similar patterns in the past.

It's because "institutions" mean "big money" for most people. That's why a lot of people are hyped when they see or hear this word. People already imagine deep pockets taking interest on something that isn't really that big, and that their involvement would mean explosion of the business or something. Just imagine, you are a small business and then someone decided to shower you with money to expand and to better yourself and market yourself. The attention would be massive for you, and business will be booming.

Aside from freebitco.in that offers 4% per annum, I don’t know other platforms that offer such to their users. And now that I think about it, that’s another potential revenue for casinos. Perhaps they should just offer some form of bonuses to users who deposit stake coins, and I’m sure it wouldn’t hurt a lot to a casino that generates lots of revenues from the losses of their peers. They can do it like this: for X amount of days a stakeable token is sitting on an account, the user will be entitled for a Y bonus. It would encourage people to use stake coins, generate profit for the casino on the house edge + stake coins.

Isn’t that idea the same with the paper bills that you are using right now? We just ‘trusted’ the central authority that issues the paper bills that it is worth something, and that it can be traded into other things. Trust is technically the core foundation of value, as we ‘believe’ that something is worth anything based on our own perception. I can’t seem to find substance in this analogy of yours, OP, because if we go by with this analogy, we would question a lot of things as to why they have X amount of value today.

Fixed games on the Olympics? Now that's some super crazy shit. Idk but for such an event, it would be nigh impossible for teams, managers, and players to fix a match. It would be too obvious and people would also notice. Also, it would be a huge scandal if ever such a thing is to happen. Just imagine a whole country being thrown into shame just because their national team wants to get pennies in exchange for the honor of keeping it clean and fair for other competitors as well.

Perhaps you might want to look on teams' performances on previous events that they participated to and make an analysis yourself before making the bet.

How could that even explain the company's interest in bitcoin mining? There's not even a connection to be made with that snippet and what Saudi Aramco is doing.

Just because they have the capability to power half the network with the waste they produce, doesn't mean they'd do it. They were approached by a mining operator, asking if they could use the waste to power their mining rigs. At best, this is a business proposal, and not Saudi Aramco hinting that they want to go into the mining business. They just provide the power but another company owns the machines. That's waaaaay different than the oil giant expressing interest on hashing.

No news here, I guess.

I don't think demand alone would move the IRS to come to their senses and consider cyptocurrencies as a form of legal tender, or a currency that the masses could use freely. There would be a lot of opposition to this idea, and even if huge companies start accepting crypto on their goods or services, there will always be bigger companies that will be affected by such a move prompting them to react and do the necessary disruption on the process of making things easy for crypto payments.

Either way, people are already using bitcoin for a lot of purposes that IMO, it wouldn't really matter much if the IRS approves of it as a currency or not.

I don't think "breaking the code" is what drives them to play slots.

It's the constant belief that one day, they will be able to get the 777 jackpot on those slots. There's no sure way to win these jackpots on these machines, and no algorithm whatsoever has been found to match what these machines are based on.

If I would guess, people are just "addicted" to the thought of winning the jackpot, and that's it.

Well that's another customer base and another payment method working for Coinbase. Doesn't really apply to other regions though, but Apple and Google accepting to fund Coinbase cards is news. Slowly and surely, these two giant tech companies will start to accept crypto-related services and might even start one of their own—though the chances for this is very slim. Anyway, specifics on this matter is highly appreciated - can't seem to find any info confirming if this is already a thing or still being discussed by all parties involved.

Been kinda busy trading alts lately and not really getting too much from my ventures. But still, a 1% increase from the previoous close is still a profit to be had, and you can't really get that anywhere unless you traded and you risked doing moves. Before, I am not contented into having just a few percent gain as everything was so easy back then since there are still loads of pumps and dumps that I'm participating. As time went by, I just realized that not everything can be gained in an instant, and that you must be thankful with everything that life is giving you.

That's why most banks hate it. Crypto has the potential to replace banks' absurd transfer fees that are based on the amount sent. This is not the case for crypto. It doesn't care how much you are transferring, so long as you are paying the minimum amount the network suggests at the time of the transaction, you're good and it will push through.


You would already have spent a fortune trying to perfect the logistics and security of moving such amount of precious metals. They have their intrinsic value, yes, but they still take up lots of resources, too.

I thought the ban was lifted last month? Well anyhow, Google Ads still can't filter ads that are meant to scam people, and they still place those scam ads on prime ad spots which makes it a lot easier for a lot of people to click on it and get their information/money/whatever taken from them. It amazes me how Google complied with FinCEN's regulation re: cryptocurrencies when they themselves continue to just accept payment and display ads that are harmful to those who use their search engine.

Carlo Paalam is actually a good boxer on his own merit. His footwork is great, his distancing and pacing is also good, plus the strength of his left is quite remarkable, as was shown on his fight against Shakhobidin Zoirov. Of course, Galal Yafai would be the favorite on this match-up, though it is also unwise to discount Carlo's tenure in the world of boxing.

This is a great bout for the gold, and no matter who of them wins, we're in for an Olympic treat.

My bank is pro-cryptocurrencies, and have received at least one newsletter regarding bitcoin and the future of cryptocurrencies. I just hope they don't change their stance once they see that it could literally phase out their business model, although I have reason to believe that they will just introduce another crypto service integrated on top of their current banking services, and it shouldn't hurt what they're currently offering right now.

---

ABA has their eyes set on the positives of crypto while the rest of the banks in the industry are persecuting crypto as if they're a spawn of the devil. If a banking association sees good in crypto, it means that there really is worth noting on the new tech that can be utilized by a lot of people, even if that in itself contradicts their business model.