lol, you lucky dog. ace high + backdoor flush draw vs trips......not sure how you called there! i'm lucky i folded preflop. i almost called w/ KQo but wanted to play tight around the points bubble:



it was that call and a couple others that made be 3-bet jam into you w/ AQo later, since i felt you were playing like a bit of a maniac. of course you showed up with an actual hand this time!



out in 7th.......

trump's chances are improving, up to 38% per betfair. i have a feeling this trend will continue.


another way of saying someone is a "strong" candidate is to say they are polarizing. hillary was extremely polarizing. so is trump. this is not necessarily a good thing, since it fires up voters in the opposing party. another angle to view this---biden is less hated than trump. this may become important with older voters and principled conservatives, who seem to be growing tired of trump's antics.

this was a tough beat for @Iv4n:



i semi-bluffed the nut flush draw the whole way, and got there on the river. then i saw him lose most of his chips on a preflop misclick a few hands later. sorry dude, shitty day!


you need to use exactly 2 of your hole cards, and then 3 of the community cards, to make a hand. lots of drawing equity to consider when playing omaha......

ummm, you forgot my name.

i'll take a 9th straight points finish and a bye for game #8 please. i know for a fact i'm gonna be on zero sleep the morning of the 16th and wouldn't mind sleeping in.

i don't think we'll see @BitcoinGirlClub tomorrow. he's been MIA since his account got hacked and he hasn't sent me chips back on SwC yet.


evergreens?

that only applies to SMS 2fa. offline TOTP authentication (like google authenticator) can't be targeted that way, and is far less susceptible to social engineering attacks in general.

exchanges should really stop supporting SMS 2fa, but it's one of those trade-offs i guess. they know SMS is way more intuitive for noobs and they are therefore more likely to use 2fa. if they offer TOTP only (requires a smartphone app and an unfamiliar process) then less people are gonna use 2fa at all.

there is still massive exponential growth potential in the cannabis and hemp industries, which is why they are evolving so incredibly fast. time is running out though. i would say 5 years ago, there was ample opportunity to get in as a producer or broker and get filthy, filthy rich off very little startup capital. now that the retail and production sectors are being consolidated by mega rich corporate interests and retail demand is also through the roof (driving prices up), the window of opportunity is quickly closing.

if you can get $50k-$100k on the table to buy into a collective, i'd say there's still a 2-3 year window of time for plebs like us to get our foot in the door on the west coast USA. maybe still 5+ years on the east coast/midwest. after that, the googles and facebooks of the cannabis industry will be entrenching themselves.

that's where i'm hoping to roll my bitcoin profits into over the next year or 2, assuming the long term bull market continues.

and that reminds me---one thing that never gets affected by economic crises? vices! people are drinking a lot more booze, smoking a lot more weed, and cigarettes too these days. in the USA, weed prices have been increasing significantly throughout the entire coronavirus crisis due to all the demand.

aren't we paying for it now? CPI doesn't tell the whole story. in fact, that's one of the whole scams behind the dominant economic metrics used today. they focus on things like day-to-day consumer consumption. CPI tells us the cost of food, clothes, medical care, things like that. it doesn't tell us what's happening in markets with elastic supply and demand and it doesn't tell us anything about investments.

just look at the price of gold or bitcoin---they're becoming increasingly unaffordable. just imagine what happens when bitcoin breaks above the 2017 high.

economists only care about achieving stable CPI inflation. they don't care that over time, you or i can afford less and less of assets capable of storing any value.

we need to switch to a more holistic approach to measuring the effects of inflation---one that takes into account rising/falling prices across all markets. i doubt that will happen because mainstream economists, heads of industry, and governments all have a strong interest in downplaying how virtually all economic growth today is being siphoned into the financial markets, leaving the working class (who don't have exposure to the markets through retirement accounts and property ownership) increasingly poor relative to real asset values.

the whole system is set up as a land grab.

any POW coin that shares mining algorithms (eg SHA256) and has a weaker hash rate is vulnerable to a 51% attack. every SHA256 coin is extremely vulnerable to attack by bitcoin miners. this is one of the reasons why minority hard forks are not particularly viable---minority miners must live in constant fear of rollbacks by majority miners.

unfortunately, that doesn't tell us much about the hash rate required to keep bitcoin secure from 51% attacks.


what is your reaction to this assertion made by peter todd? https://twitter.com/peterktodd/status/697532042553065472

the overflow bug was not a hard fork. it was a perfectly valid part of the protocol that required new rules (a soft fork) to fix.

not everybody agreed either---enough users and miners just soft forked their nodes such that miners on the forked chain eventually overtook the original chain with proof of work. it was a chain split where the original branch was orphaned off and no longer exists, not a hard fork where everybody on the network upgraded protocol rules. as long as 51% of miners enforced the fork, people with old software remained on the correct chain.

an emergency soft fork is much easier since we just need 51% of miners to enforce it to prevent a chain split.

with a hard fork, a chain split is guaranteed. any node on the network that doesn't upgrade = chain split.

i actually don't mind. i've been around in this space long enough to easily sniff out scam exchanges and fake volume. i am more so mystified at how noobs always seem to end up on these unknown scam exchanges that are clearly faking volume and have no real liquidity. why? how? why don't they do any research on the exchanges they are entrusting their coins to?

it's too bad we live in a nanny state society where investors feel no need to do due diligence in their business relationships and investments. tbh, the truth is that most noobs need to get scammed once or twice before learning their lesson. there's no way around it IMO.


lots of exchanges completely fake volume and liquidity. they spoof orders on both sides and use algorithms to multiply the reported volume vs actual volume traded.

exchanges can't easily use bots to pump volume with real trades. that's a very quick route to insolvency since real traders would be eating up their "fake" liquidity.

oh well, add another bug fix to the hard fork wishlist. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Hardfork_Wishlist

we've got 80 years to sort this one out. i'll be dead by then.


i'm not sure which forks you're referring to. the fork that fixed the 2010 overflow bug was a soft fork. so was the fork that fixed the 2018 inflation bug.

i remember peter todd saying that satoshi implemented at least one hard fork in the very early days (nobody realized it at the time), but it's certainly never happened in recent history.

this isn't so different than ethereum forking to delay the difficulty bomb. everyone on the network has incentive to fork together to fix it. one would hope that a simple bug fix would not be contentious, but i'm sure someone will create some drama over it.

i'm glad you give me so much credit---it comes in handy when i need to steal some blinds.

from early position, with that stack, i actually would shove AA/KK......but i'd shove a lot of weaker hands too tbh.

anyway, i'm all registered and ready to go for tomorrow's game. can't afford to take any qualifiers off unfortunately with these super tight standings!

ah, yeah, i previously thought 3.33-4 was possible, during all the chaos with the george floyd protests and fears about a second wave of coronavirus. i think betfair ended up topping out around 3.00. i'm now guessing that was the best odds we'll see. the pendulum has been swinging against trump for months now......it's bound to swing back in his favor soon, and with 3 months until the election, the timing couldn't be better for him.

that's the annualized rate. the quarter over quarter drop was a slightly less scary 9.5%.


where i live, all the bars are closed again, and no more dining in at restaurants. a couple local businesses have closed for good.

july unemployment numbers get published later today. i'm eager to see whether the june recovery was a fluke or not. my feeling is it's gonna be a long and painfully slow recovery to get back to pre-pandemic employment levels.

the expansion of amazon and other e-commerce and delivery companies also has major implications for the shape of the economy. going forward, we should see less full-time workers with benefits and more gig workers and part-time workers.

interesting, thanks for sharing. it opens the door for nationally chartered banks to take crypto deposits and perform related services, although the advice letter makes it sound like it was already implicitly legal anyway.

this won't have any effect on derivatives and securities (ETF) markets since those types of offerings also have to comply with CFTC, SEC, etc regulations.

as for encouraging adoption, i don't expect much to happen immediately. most banks will be too conservative to dip their toes in for quite a while, and small, tech-minded banks can only penetrate so far.

having said all that, it's quite a sight to see. bitcoin sure has come a long way.

are you a CPA? do you have a considerable number of clients investing in crypto?

re "they are a ways away from mass audits" i tend to agree. the document published by CryptoTrader.Tax indicates they are still way behind the curve, and still need to figure out how to make crypto audits even remotely affordable.

the 2019 tax return check box and mass letter campaigns were probably just scare tactics intended to deter noncompliance in the meantime.

why me? i'm no expert.

another run to 2.9-3 seems possible, but certainly not guaranteed. i don't think we'll get any better than that. i think the current odds are pretty good value, considering the fact that i still consider trump a slight favorite and definitely no worse than 50-50.

when is this, the year 2050?

just look at what happened with self-driving cars---the tech shortcomings and never ending delays. even when they do arrive, half of people say they will never ride in one. i'm sure that translates to airplanes too.

re the airline industry, i say fuck 'em. let the strong companies absorb the weak, keep what workers on they can, and let the chips fall where they may. executives have been paying themselves obscene salaries and shareholders pocketing huge profits for many years---why would they deserve a bailout now? let them pony up their own capital, or otherwise let their company go the way of the dodo.

that's a pretty interesting counterpoint to "the primary model" which has performed impeccably well for the last century and heavily favors trump:


like i've said before, it's hard to view this election as much different than a coin flip, give or take 10% chance or so.

trump voters are unpredictable.

that's why the seychelles is so popular. binance is there. so is bitmex, poloniex, and other well known brands that offer unverified trading. there is a world of difference between them and selective scammers like hitbtc and yobit. in the wild west there are plenty of scammers about, but reputation and branding mean a lot. binance is not at all interested in being lumped in with the likes of hitbtc and yobit.

keep in mind, when people complain about frozen accounts and confiscated coins, we're in no position to judge what actually happened. if someone deposits OFAC sanctioned coins, or coins linked to an exchange hack, or withdraws directly from a DNM etc they are never gonna be up front about it, and we can't blame a centralized exchange for having terms that block those deposits. we can only take an overview and judge by the numbers whether an exchange is likely to be engaging in selective scamming and fraud.


that's nanny state reasoning tbh. exchanges like bitstamp and paxos freeze huge sums of money for months at a time without communicating with their clients. we just take their word for it that their AML/KYC related reasons are "valid".

i trust bitstamp like a trust a bank robber. i would never deposit coins with those scumbags.