I don't mind either tbh. If its BTC, then so be it, if its USD, so be it. The only fact that makes the option of accepting payments as BTC both risky and enticing is when the market price starts fluctuating, whether it be towards the positive side or negative side. Naturally, I think most would actually accept USD instead of BTC, all because of its volatility. Some may not even use the received funds to trade, but rather for other things, so USD would be the best way to go. If somehow, one way or another, BTC started to stabilize at a certain range of price, then most would probably accept BTC instead of USD, I of which would be one of them. But currently, there isn't really that much of an advantage of choosing either, nor a disadvantage, so I opt to choose whichever is pretty much available.

The rebellion was probably because of insufficient help provided by the government. Without any proper support from the government, countless families would probably encounter a lot of problems surviving through a lockdown, even if we say the duration would only last for about 1-2 months. This actually causes negative effects instead because people now refuse to follow the orders of the government, hence an increased chance of people actually being infected by the virus.

It's not a matter of everyone helping, its a matter of what they could actually help with. And tbh, the government NEEDS to lead it. Even if we do say some people are actively contributing, without proper order to it, it would just lead to dissatisfaction among those that are being helped and not being helped.

Why are we even judging it by its price? Sure, talking about if it could reach another new high is fun and all, after all, if you hodl and that happened, easy profit. But that doesn't mean that THAT itself defines what BTC is. If it never reached it, then so be it. It's not like that BTC code has a self-destruction sequence that states that when it doesn't reach the ATH in x amount of time, the system would be destroyed or something like that. BTC isn't an investment in the end, it's just a means just like fiat. A medium of transaction which is basically done over the internet, one that no central power has control of.

Indeed. However, people are mostly ignorant ( no offense ) and just donate to whichever site looks like a "legitimate" one. Even if a red cross donation site was cloned, people would probably not notice it until it was too late. I'd say it'd be a lot better if social media actually spread tips/info on how to accurately determine legit websites. This doesn't only apply to the scams out there, but also all the fake news that keeps spreading globally through social media. Just look at how many people believe about some stupid remedies that say that it could "prevent" the virus from spreading to themselves. And yet, people still believe them. I know, fear probably influenced them, but as humans, we should be quite rational in determining decisions made, after all, we ourselves would suffer from it if anything wrong happens.

Legit is a hard thing to find, especially with how the market is. The analysis wouldn't cut it since some are just spouting bs in the first half and then proceeds to advertise shitcoins in the second half. I doubt YT has the time to actually filter properly what content is good and what content is not, especially since the crypto scene in terms of videos and the like isn't really that developed. If factual knowledge were presented like definitions and the like, then it's possible, but if it's a vague idea that can be seen as a form of advertisement and or scam, then YT has every right to proceed with their actions.

It isn't risky, but it is still a risk. Even if we do say that it is a safe asset, it's volatility is a factor that could never be removed at the moment. Although I do believe it should stabilize in the future, as it is right now, it is still a risk. That is if you were to look at it as an investment. If you were to think of it as to what it really is, being a cryptocurrency, it's actually a lot safer compared to the others. Just the fact that it uses a decentralized system already gives it an edge among the others. The only reason that hacks and the like happen is because of hackers finding holes in exchanges, where users use them as a wallet, which is not supposed to be done.

A lot? It could start at a bare minimum of $15k to $20k I think. But tbh, money isn't really an issue since that's one of the most easier problems to resolve. You'd probably encounter walls during the establishment of the casino itself, mainly on reputation and the like. The coding and the games that are played can easily be resolved, again, with money, but reputation could be quite hard to come by. Even if you hire people to advertise your casino all over the internet, as long as a few honest reviews popup that gives your site a bad image, then it'd be pretty bad IMO. It'd take a lot of time for one casino to be famous ngl, and no amount of money could probably help you with that.

Not to be gender racist or anything but women have their own stage and men have their own stage. It doesn't necessarily mean that both can't enter the stage of the other, but MOST would opt to enter the stage that is normally for their own gender. You'd see a lot of males entering tech-y side and you'd see females enter the fashion side of things but the vice versa could be perfectly normal. Sides, you wouldn't normally discuss the idea of gender in these kinds of things. Heck, gender doesn't impede one's ability, only stupidity could impede it. Not only on blockchain/crypto/tech stuff, but this also applies to the entirety of the work force. Just that human bias is quite a strong factor in someone's brain that it turns itself into the supposedly "norm", which isn't.

Investing in multiple assets is a given when you are trading. Putting everything in one asset shows that you're basically placing it all on that asset. An All in kind of thing when compared to gambling. However, spending BTC may not be the best-given choice, Especially since the market hasn't really reached the time where it would go to the moon. Most especially if it is going to the moon, hodlers would not bother spending their BTC.

As for banks closing down, nope. The money around basically flows depending on how banks manage it. If banks close down, money could be said to have stopped flowing, aka, the economy has stagnated. What's worse than your country's economy stagnating right? It'd probably be better to just have said the country is basically dead.

No? I mean, people wouldn't be in debt if they actually got sad about how much money they lost. It really isn't an issue of how much you lose, but how much you can win. That is, in the mindset of those that are addicted to gambling so much that they go under debt. You know how people in adrenaline would forget the pain in their bodies and just continue pushing forward? Might kind of be a similar experience in terms of those that are desperate in gambling. You may say that that wouldn't happen to you, but giving you time not to think at all is a lot easier, hence putting you in much pressure that the adrenaline in your body is the only capable thing that works properly.

Isn't just to think? No offense for those that were scammed but that would be the most basic thing to do in most situations. Think. Not from a single POV, but from every possible POV. Whether it be tiring or a pain in the ass, you should still check it out. As for hacking, I doubt there are a lot of instances where a hacker would attack a person's pc intentionally. Most are because people often click at something that let's the hacker come in. It's like, you're opening the door for the hacker to come in, welcoming them even. If that was the case, same solution, think. Think before you click. If you were to be attacked specifically though, that may be a different issue since the hacker could use specific scenarios to bait you in. Most scenarios in the internet are for in a general sense, so thinking about it could easily show that it was a hack/scam.

That is if the virus could make an exit and not add any more damages than it already has by the time the halving comes. This virus concerns human lives, so I doubt those people obtaining stimulus checks would use it as an investment. However, if let's say, a few months after the halving and a vaccine is found, the market would probably make a boom about it and as you said, act as a catalyst. But then again, the government ain't stupid.

Just like you said, those with no urgent needs would invest, BUT would those with no urgent needs even receive the stimulus check? Everything is planned out to help only those who are truly in need after all, so I doubt such a loophole couldn't actually be seen by the government.

Well, they have their own reasons and laws for that. Better much respect that tbh. Sides, the internet has a lot of ways to bypass the bans set by their country so I doubt that those legit users from Russia would quit just like that cause of the ban. I also doubt Russia has the ability to ban gambling ads selectively, I doubt they would put that much effort when they can just ban the site entirely. There's also the negative notion of what gambling is, so can't really blame them. Probably more than 7 out of 10 people, if asked, would answer that gambling is a negative influence and most would answer that only bad people would gamble. And technically it isn't wrong, but it's more related to the person itself rather than gambling, but who would care about that now no?

Dice and Roulette. If you were ignorant about basically anything else, these two would be the best to start with since after playing 2-3 games, you'd immediately learn the odds of you winning and losing. If you were a bit more knowledgeable about sports, then start with that. It coincides with what you enjoy watching after all, so it's a much more preferable start if you know the stuff that concerns about it. Dice and roulette can be quite repetitive, so it's only an entry-level. Play cards after gambling for a bit since it gives a bit more enjoyment out there. Different combinations, different mindsets, psychological factors and the like, thinking of stuff like those can give you quite an enjoyment.

They do and that's why they are trying to give out whatever help they can, and they hope that the people would understand the reasons for the lockdowns and quarantines currently understanding. It isn't a matter of money IMO, there are millions of people in a country and if the government were to fund each and every one of them, it would take an astronomic amount. Not to mention the funds they would need to spend on supplies, as well as possibly researching regarding the virus.

Any kind of help for them is nearly dead at the moment. Not to mention them, even us who are relatively well aren't able to help for the long term. Sure, we can try to give out food and supplies to them, but that would only be a temporary approach. The fundamental problem wouldn't really be solved.

Nope. Though it depends on what a goal is tbh. Some people have a goal of spending and earning without saving anything ( there are a lot of weird people out there ) so some may hit the jackpot with your question. As for me though, Gambling is just for fun, a hobby in a sense ( and tbh, a bad one). I don't doubt that if I ever start playing addictively, I could potentially lose my assets and myself and I am totally not prepared for it. Not to mention that only a few friends of mine know that I gamble, and I honestly doubt they would be able to stop me if I am ever to become an addicted gambler. Sides, gambling in of itself is a luck game. It's like your literally and I mean literally, leaving your life up to luck. You literally get two cards, then bam, your life is decided without any notion of you interfering for it.

No. But that doesn't mean you can use it. To be perfectly honest, the only good decision in gambling is not to play or participate in gambling sessions. I like using the martingale strategy cause it makes my brain believe that there's logic in what I'm doing when in all honesty, it's all just based on luck. Though that belief often gets crushed after losing twice or thrice my original bet. It's quite logical if you think of it, but in its purest sense, luck isn't something that was supposed to be logical, it was supposed to be filled with illogical stuff and the like. Though experience is a factor, it's more like the gut and something like that.

No matter how high the stimulus check would give out, I doubt that people would invest it in the market. The government would probably feel pretty stupid if they saw how the money they gave out to be used for supplies to resolve the outbreak problem be used in investment that would probably take some time before producing results. Not to mention that those that would receive the full stimulus check would be those on the lower end of financial power, which in all honesty, are probably in dire need of funds with their main source of income currently being cut off because of the current lockdowns. There'd probably be a few out there who would invest, but the majority probably wouldn't

Exited the market when it was around $9k. Had to cause of a few projects of mine that needed some funds and sadly, the outbreak pretty much cut off most of my source of funds. Might re enter, but it honestly depends on how the current outbreak continues. Without any source of stable income, investing seems quite scary IMO. For HODL moments, it doesn't really depend on the current situation of the market or it's possible futures but rather depends on the capability of the HODLER themselves. Cause honestly, if you're gonna hodl, does the current price matter? As long as you can afford it, you can freely buy and hodl it. It's a matter of if you are willing to spend currently

I'd probably have to stabilize my current money flow. The lockdown kind of ruined it, with expenses here and there but no constant income. Pretty much ruined my budgeting plan for every month, So i'd rather stabilize that first before trying to go and gamble. Sides, after the outbreak, I doubt businesses would be able to return to normal immediately. Some, maybe, but most of them would probably have to adjust, just like what my problem is, to the issue of the ruined flow of money for their business. Not to mention that some businesses require supplies from other companies, so it solely depends on how they would work out.

On the other hand though, I'm using e platforms to gamble from time to time in the past, so maybe that's what I would return to. Not much Casinos in my place anyways.