As an active member of the Polish board, I'm just popping in to express my support for wwzsocki's application for mod's position (+ hopefully a merit source) I don't know if there is such a function as a local moderator, because in this thread the idea is not for wwzsocki to become a global official moderator, but only to be able to moderate our small backyard where a dozen or so users are active. nothing more. And it is only to do so temporarily until our current moderator returns. Do you really idealize this function so much that you demand from a candidate to be whiter than paper? Candidate chosen by the community for which he is about to do this function.
This. We only need someone with mod's privileges for our local board only. So hopefully this is not asking for too much. Just to recap - wwzsocki was nominated by our small community and encouraged to create this application thread, it's not like some power hungry dude just wanting to become a mod out of the blue. Hopefully @theymos will see this topic and will give it a fair consideration. |
|
|
|
The new era was born with the online platform,many works now was done by the Artificial Intelligence.Some gambler also using the AI for the betting,but it was against the rules of gambling site.It’s hard to predict the outcome of the gambling betting,because the gambling site was created in the way of hard predictable one.The gamblers who had huge knowledge in the gambling industry were able to make money from the gambling sites.The gamblers should keep their strategies as the secret one,because the strategy of one gamblers will not suit to the game of the other gamblers.So use your own strategy to make money using the gambling sites.
What are you talking about? Using AI to gamble in the usual casino games makes little sense. Maybe you could use it for Black Jack or for statistical analysis for sports betting, but that's pretty much it and I can't see how any online casino could prevent that. And outcome is not hard to predict in online casino games if you know the house edge (any respectable casino should be informing their players of such). You might not know the outcome of each individual game, but you will know the expected long-term outcome. Strategy is either good or useless, and either works for any player or for none. |
|
|
|
It is not that DDP was tired in championship round, but Strickland looked more fresh. Ive noticed he has good tank in late rounds agains Adesanya. In general, I like main event fight. I think Strickland landed more strikes. That would be enough to win imho, but it was DDP who welcomed each strike with face.
Strickland looking fresh in the last rounds is proof he could've been more active in the earlier rounds. I think even his corner told him to get more active. As for DDP, i think he's one of the fighters who would breathe through their mouths when getting even a little bit tired. That makes him looked way more exhausted than he actually is. Looking at the number of strikes alone could be deceptive. He could have built that advantage in the 2 rounds won but still lost the other 3 rounds. Plus, the actual damage caused is what really matters. Who faces DDP now? Izzy?
If Adesnaya is to return, this would be the perfect time. If not Adesanya, it'd have to be either Cannonier, a rematch with Strickland, Chimaev (when he recovers from whatever health problems he is having) although he doesn't deserve the title shot yet, or Paolo Costa if he manages to defeat Whittaker. P.S. Feel sad for Strickland, as I think hype around him going to go really low, but he is such a funny guy  Why though? The hype around him was built on his personality, not on his skills etc. He's not going anywhere and he's got nothing to be ashamed of. He lost by solid decision against a guy who was not only undefeated in the UFC, but who also won all his fights (apart from one) by finishes. |
|
|
|
What a fight! Pretty much what everyone was expecting, except Du Plessis didn't gas out in the championship rounds. He looked tired as hell from round 2 but kept going anyway. It looked like Sean didn't press the gas pedal soon enough and let himself lose rounds, especially round 3, which turned out to be a deciding one. Maybe he should've gone for a few takedowns himself. As always, whenever there's a split decision, people are crying that Strickland got robbed etc, but I don't see it this way. I was rooting for Sean but Dricus was more dominating was causing more damage. Full scorecard:  |
|
|
|
(...)
Practically ETFs are nothing but a piece of paper given to anyone investing in Bitcoin. Whereas we as a community have the real satoshis in our wallets and we are proud of it. ETFs for me is a way to gain control over those who want to invest in Bitcoin but are clueless.
This could be a big problem right here. Everyone was "clueless" at the start of their Bitcoin adventure, so if ETFs are to take over all the clueless investors, the community will be shrinking. (...)
It is evident with the current price of bitcoin, & that ETFs are not the ones we thought that the price of Bitcoin would pump. (...)
The dump after the approval was somewhat expected, it's just speculators "selling the news" and the approval was already priced in before it was announced. Some hotheads expected real fireworks in the first days, but we'll have to be more patient as the positive effects will be spread over time. |
|
|
|
I think there's more on the line for AJ though. Ngannou isn't expected to win, and shouldn't on paper, but if AJ actually loses this fight then that seriously knocks him down the pecking order not to mention embarrasses him. AJ has got himself back on track to soon challenge for the belts again but a loss would be devastating. AJ even proclaimed "Every opponent me and Fury have in common, I've knocked them out" recently, but means nothing if Ngannou flattens him. However, if AJ can knock down or stop him then that puts him in front of Tyson with something he couldn't do. AJ really needs this win to get a one up of Fury and sets the fight up between them nicely.
You're probably right. I didn't really think of what it looks like from AJ's perspective. Losing to Francis could be a big setback for him. Unless they both would give a tremendous fight and the fans would demand a rematch etc then he could get revenge in a rematch and all lived happily ever after... My first thought is that AJ's loss would be a huge dent in the entire boxing as a sport. It doesn't look great when an outsider comes in and just casually beats up all the top guys. But on second thought, it could be spun as Ngannou being some sort of prodigy, a one-in-a-million natural boxer etc. I'm sure he already brought in a lot of new fans to the sport, as things looked pretty stale without him. And AJ Vs Fury could still be a possibility if both lost their fights. But that's unlikely to happen. |
|
|
|
A week after Bitcoin ETFs Approval, why prices of many coins/tokens decreased?
It will take some time for the demand for spot ETFs to affect Bitcoin's price. Most, if not all, of the newly approved ETFs either already had their own bitcoins to offer to the first wave of investors, or they had over-the-counter deals with Coinbase (or maybe other entities) to purchase btc from them outside of normal exchange (so with no impact on the price). At the same time, a lot of speculators start dumping, following the "buy the rumours, sell the news" tactic. Hence the price drop. |
|
|
|
1. Do you want large institutional financial organisations buying large amounts of bitcoins and then locking it up in centralized trading platforms?
Why not exactly? You can't stop anyone from buying bitcoins. If you could, it wouldn't be trustless and censorship-free, meaning it would lose its most important feature. And if we don't have any control over who is buying it, there's no point of asking such question. Plus, with large financial institutions buying it, there's less risk of it getting banned. 2. Do you want Bitcoin to be a commodity or a currency? ETFs will destroy the goal of Bitcoin becoming a currency.
Are there actually any developers out there trying to make it useful as a means of payment? Looks like the lightning network is all we have, but it's far from perfection. It seems like the "community" (whatever that means) quietly accepted Bitcoin becoming mostly a speculative instrument. 5. ETFs destroy pseudo anonymity, because it is highly regulated with strict KYC requirements implemented to identify every trader on their platform.
I think you mean "pseudonymity". Yeah, this is probably the main threat. When most investors choose to hold ETFs rather than real bitcoins, there's a greater risk of regulators pushing for delegalisation of any non-KYC wallets and other services. |
|
|
|
(...) As Bitcoin steps into the spotlight of mainstream finance, the potential for increased adoption, innovation, and global acceptance is vast. (...)
I can't see how the approval of ETFs could have any real effect on adoption or innovation. In terms of public awareness, Bitcoin has been in the mainstream for quite some time now, you will struggle to find any adult who hasn't yet heard about Bitcoin, so ETFs won't change anything in this matter. If anything, I can see how the approval could make things worse. If a lot of people move from holding bitcoins themselves in non-custodial wallets in favour of regulated, insured (and sometimes tax-free) ETFs, there will be less usage, less adoption, and less incentive for developers to innovate. |
|
|
|
When Blackrock has their ETF, they will push to sell it to everyone, and considering they have all the elites money with them, trillions, they could spare just a few dozen billions into bitcoin which would be insane investment overall and we would go up. They are not going to buy bitcoin themselves, that 78 year old with a billion in the bank? They ain't ever putting that into bitcoin, BUT they could put some of it at Blackrocks ETF, which they will use to buy more bitcoins to cover it and it all helps us.
I'm quite positive that the ETFs will have a positive impact on Bitcoin's price (in a longer run) but we should stay realistic and not get carried away. Any "old money" investors that wanted exposure to Bitcoin, could've done so long time ago without spot ETFs. And the "elites" will not be throwing billions into BTC just because it's now available as an ETF. If they made decisions that way, they wouldn't be elites in the first place. What ETFs do, is to make it more convenient for unsophisticated investors to get in + make it possible for some types of regulated funds, such as retirement funds to offer that option to their clients. BlackRock and Vanguard hold the voting rights for the shares the index funds own. Not only they are the top holders but they have a huge influence over everything they hold.
If I'm not mistaken, they both now offer proxy voting options to their clients. |
|
|
|
Didn't watch the interviews but pretty sure Strickland went to have a funny skit and went on to talk about some random sht about everybody. Lol.
Here's the essence and probably the most quoted/retweeted bit. https://twitter.com/SStricklandMMA/status/1747734279516250446Strickland says how it is. He already won in my eyes Hope he doesn't get arrested for "hate" speech or something. There's no free speech pretty much anywhere outside of the US. But it's also good to see these guys act nice with each other before a match. The McGregor routine is getting old now.
I just watched a live pre-fight conference. Sean said it was never personal and they both shook hands on the agreement to fight to the death or something. It was nice. In terms of odds, I'm leaning towards DDP. Strickland made it clear he's going there to brawl and will keep pressing forward, which is not a smart tactic for him. Dricus is visibly much bigger and stronger than him so he should be focussing on utilising his cardio advantage. Hopefully his team will talk some sense into him before the fight. |
|
|
|
Dzięki za info. Wyskoczyły już pierwsze artykuły prasowe na ten temat: https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2024/01/16/tusd-loses-1-peg-amid-binances-fdusd-focus-analyst/Z tego co piszą, to wygląda że ludzie masowo wymieniają TUSD na FDUSD na Binance, co spowodowane jest tym że znieśli opłaty za handel na niektórych parach FDUSD, oraz tym że Binance ma jakiś ciekawy projekt związany z FDUSD na launch pool, gdzie można zarobić na depozytach FDUSD. Jeżeli to jedyny powód to może i byłaby to dogodna szansa na arbitraż, ale ja bym nie ryzykował. Za mało wiem o TUSD i za dużo kasy trzeba by w to włożyć żeby wyciągnąć jakieś konkretne zyski. |
|
|
|
Here we go. In today's Forbes article, our good friend Jamie Dimon promises to shut up about Bitcoin once and for all. I don't believe he will though. Or maybe it's just his way of saying that his judgement on Bitcoin was wrong without admitting it outright. JPMorgan’s Jamie Dimon Says He Won’t Talk About Bitcoin Anymore—After Trashing It One Last Timehttps://www.forbes.com/sites/dereksaul/2024/01/17/jpmorgans-jamie-dimon-says-he-wont-talk-about-bitcoin-anymore-after-trashing-it-one-last-time/?sh=3a4aec0329c1TOPLINE
Jamie Dimon, the billionaire CEO of the U.S.’ largest bank JPMorgan Chase, offered what he said would be his last-ever takedown of bitcoin Wednesday, maintaining his long-held attitude toward the $830 billion cryptocurrency even after last week’s breakthrough for institutional investment in bitcoin involving JPMorgan.
KEY FACTS
Bitcoin is akin to a “pet rock” because it “does nothing,” Dimon said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” from the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
Dimon explained the only “real use cases” for bitcoin are criminal activities like sex trafficking and money laundering, echoing his prior criticisms of the massive digital asset.
In what Dimon characterized as “the last time” he’d ever talk about bitcoin, he suggested that bitcoin derives the rest of its value from paper trading rather than serving a tangible purpose, but still believes investors have a right to buy bitcoin because it’s a “free country.
Dimon’s still-dismissive attitude toward bitcoin notably comes a week after regulators approved bitcoin exchange-traded funds, the first-ever investment vehicles enabling backers to invest in real-time bitcoin prices via standard security exchanges.
(...) |
|
|
|
Of course, the effect might be delayed, but I speculate that once the halving is done and we commence a bull run, many are going to FOMO on the ETF and it could be the biggest factor for this bull run this year or at least this cycle going into $100k or more.
I don't think all the big players like Blackrock would even bother with filing that ETF application if they didn't know there will be a big demand for it. So I'm fairly confident that this will have a significant effect, even if it's stretched over a longer time. And if the demand for all those ETFs overlaps with the "normal", post-halving pump (resulting from the 4-year cycle pattern) then breaking the $100k barrier sounds very plausible. |
|
|
|
|
There's a wider problem in how certain terms and language get distorted and twisted to the point it's becoming harder to even accurately describe reality.
The use of the term "recession" is one of the examples. This word is being tossed around very loosely, often by news outlets that are looking for eye-catching headlines to generate more clicks. They will cry recession even when there's economic growth, just because it was lower than in past periods or lower than expected.
Then we end up with situations when so-called experts can't even agree if we are in a recession or not.
The term should be reserved for a PROLONGED downturn in economic activity, otherwise it's just scaring people for no good reason.
|
|
|
|
I certainly believe that for at least another three cycles we will see history repeat and significant all time highs will happen 12-18 months after the halving.
I think the next halving will be the last one and will mark the end of the 4-year cycle pattern. The following ones will still have some effect, but they won't be the major catalyst for the bull runs. I expect Bitcoin to become less volatile and start acting more like traditional assets. It could deter a lot of the retail investors hoping for crazy gains in a short time, but with all the spot ETFs approved, there should be more than enough demand to compensate for it. As much as ETFs becoming the major factor impacting the market is not necessarily a good thing, Bitcoin becoming more stable probably is. It could become more appealing to more risk-averse investors, who are looking for something closer to a reliable store of value, rather than a highly speculative and volatile instrument. |
|
|
|
Isnt this can be called luck, as he managed to dominate Adesanya for 4 rounds? I just typed "best ufc striker", and among many tops, Adesaya was often among top5. Isnt it luck, if you beat best striker with simple shell defence? Isnt it luck to have a title fight when the last opponent you have beat was unranked guy with 1-1 record in UFC? Isnt it luck that Adesanya was not Adesanya and had mental problems (that is imho) that day? Of course Strickland improved, is a good fighter and no doubt he deserved that belt. But there were so many "little things" with Strickland and that belt, so I have called it luck. The answer to every of those questions is No Essentially, to say Strickland was "lucky" is like taking away the credit he deserves. He put in a lot of hard work and executed an effective tactic. Out of his last 11 fights he only lost to Pereira, who later won 2 belts. Anyhow, here's the video from the press conference. Sean did not disappoint: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsQYhhAlu7o&tAnd here's Dricus' one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-S0pZmBxUL0 |
|
|
|
We can see the price crashing since its release.
I would think that it will take a while for the ETF's to have any impact because they were just released.
Crash, if you can call it that, was likely due to people "buying the rumours and selling the news". i.e. those who loaded up earlier when approval of ETFs was uncertain are now taking their profits. Many will be looking to buy back at lower levels. As for the actual, non-speculative, impact of ETFs - this will be delayed in time. Current demand is probably mostly satisfied with over-the-counter (OTC) deals (e.g. Coinbase's own stash) or bitcoins acquired earlier by the ETFs issuers. Once those run out, they'll have to start buying on the market, driving the price up. |
|
|
|
My favorite type of video for sports content is seeing the highlights with relevant commentary after the match.
That's my favourite type of sport-related content too. Even though it's not necessarily directly betting-related, as it covers events that already happened, it helps you to get to know teams or individuals (i.e. fighters) and their strengths/weaknesses in a relatively short time, which can be useful for the purpose of any future betting. Watching full games or fights is just too time-consuming. I like commentary on how a team has been doing in its league, past history with the other team, insights on who is injured or who is scoring a lot lately etc. These things of talked about by a reliable source who knows what they are talking about can help you make more educated decisions in betting, so I appreciate this dissection of matches if done Right. There's surely space for such in gsmbling probably.
Seconded. But obviously, all games can't be covered, so the focus should go to the best-value betting opportunities, justified by the statistics etc. |
|
|
|
|
Learn how your brain works (in general) in terms of dopamine release etc and be aware that anyone can get addicted.
Know that many casinos are deliberately designed with the help of psychologists to be as entertaining and addictive as possible. The same goes for special offers, bonuses etc.
Never gamble when you're in an overly emotional state, whether it's a feeling of euphoria or sadness. Always aim for a cold-headed approach. The same advice can be applied to any other area of life.
Learn about odds and house edge and how to recognise good betting opportunities. Math is your friend.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
