Well Finland is in final, which i bet on with 19 multiplier, and 151 multiplier that it wins. I am already happy and rest is just free ride from here. Too bad that they only accepted low bet from me.

(Edit: now that I think about it. I might have bet it as a semifinal nr1 place, that would explain that high multiplier, and lost. Yep, i am an idiot. Well, anyway...)

I sincerely still think it's almost obvious that they win, but maybe i am biased and delusional. And of course there's a change they could make some sort of political demonstration in the end and get disqualified. But it's not like i would be in loss anymore, so that's fine with me. Some of these participants already wore palestanian keffiyeh scarf which is a statement but maybe too suddle for the rules to kick in. But in the words of windowsman95: "no rules"

I am not an expert, but wouldn't lag issues be handled easily with dedicated servers that are directly for poker tables only? While it could get huge traffic, i am assuming that this online poker section would have only fraction of the users that are using rest of the casino. And given the competition that already exists on online poker, i would assume that they won't start by getting all the traffic from other online poker sites.

And while stake has existing userbase, and there are probably countless people eager to try it out instantly when it comes. So making an ultra secure, fast, battle tested and patched new software, that's ready to be instantly responsible of all that money and huge traffic is a huge task that might take some time.

My point of view isn't needed, there has been research that men are men are more likely to be addicted to gambling. This could however be because men have been already gambling more and it's more culturally accepted for men to gamble, So naturally there will be more addicted men. And if we look at the places where equality of women and men are higher, we instantly see that this ratio changes. Like in sweden for example there already are more women with gambling problems than men.

https://nypost.com/2019/04/05/women-with-gambling-problems-in-this-country-outnumber-men/

Also that comment on women having "weak emotions" is just not true. Using your brain to quit to save money is literally dealing with your feelings. While fomoing, not "giving up" and chasing the loss is being controlled by feelings.

Men in general just want to avoid dealing with their feelings, except anger as they aren't being encouraged to do so, so they think they are above them, even though they are most of the time totally controlled by them, and men often diss women for being illogical and emotional, and at the same time they don't even realize that anger is a feeling that can come from not dealing with your other feelings.

Women that i know are emotionally way more equipped then men, because they are encouraged by peers to speak about them. As men in general don't seem to understand or regocnize their feelings, so advertising for example is highly effective because they don't understand what their feelings are being played with.

I don't get your points. Wouldn't rich people just bet with higher stakes then poor people? I mean poor people would adjust their bets lower if they would be happy with the wins they get with those. So i assume that rich people wouldn't play with small bets either, because being satisfied on the size of the wins is highly subjective and relative to your wealth.

Winning a dollar isn't much for a poor people just like winning 100 isn't much to rich people. And if that doesn't apply on someone's definition of rich, they can just scale the numbers up or down. My point is that it's all relative. Rich people play with 20$ bets while poor cash out 20$ bets. Obviously there are often differences in income, social status and friends that can help them, but in general, i think they don't play with few bucks when they play.

Sure. I avoid talking with them about betting opportunities, or big wins. I might mention losses to encourage them. Just like with a friend who is sober, i don't invite them to bars if they don't want to, i won't offer them a loan if they need it for beer, and i don't talk how fun we had last night. I only talk about hangovers and lost money, if i need to talk about that subject. Because i know quitting anything you are addicted to is hard. When i quitted smoking i avoided bars for a year. And few times when i went into them during that year, i felt isolated and alone when everyone went for smoke.

No one wants to feel seperate and left alone in a conversation, especially when they are struggling to avoid the thing.
Eventually you can go back to talking about gambling, but only after someone is clearly changed their routines, have their financial issues in control and are not tempted anymore. When they can handle it, it can actually make them stronger, when they know they can handle it.

I am not so sure about that. Depends what you mean by being "more biased and ideologically seclined". Both of them try to stay apolitical, but i am pretty sure an oscar winner won't be discualifed if someone wears palestinian flag colors as a form of support, or a maga hat while picking the prize. Also politcs are impossible to avoid in movies.

Eurovision on the other hand wouldn't accept anything that sort behavior from the bands. And by applying strict restrictions political statements or slogans aren't allowed, they are actually setting rules on which political issues are allowed, as everything is politics.

I guess their reasoning is to avoid people using that as their propaganda tool. But it's really vague what they mean by political statement. Is not eating meat, or eating meat one of them? Or what kind of relationships people are allowed to have? Imho it's just based on judges feelings on the subject. What they like, and what they don't like to see. Just like in Oscars.

Anyway, it's starting soon. I wish i could bet on how many protests there are going to be.

Regulations on money laundering are complex and ever changing, but i don't think we are going back. Even if they weren't required to ask kyc from new users doesn't mean that they wouldn't need to ask kyc ever. But ask yourself, if you had build a casino, and that would start making huge profits for you. Would you:

A: Try evade regulations as much as possible and work intentionally knowing, that you might be enabling money laundering, and to top of that possibly getting terrorist flag for intentionally aiding terrorists or criminals that decided to use your site as part of their money laundering circle? And risk of going jail for ages for that?

B: Make it a legit business, where you wouldn't need to cover your tracks and watch over your shoulder rest of your life and just comply with regulations?

Obviously kyc affects their customers, that's why it's supposed to be effective.

But would it be causing the spike though? Wouldn't people rather accumulate by just buying the cheap tokens now rather then gambling hard? As it's probably more cost effective if only reason is to speculate with the price. Or has someone done the math on how much $ worth you need to gamble in order to get one $shfl?

And there might be some weird algorithm that changes rewards depending how you are gambling. That is rewarding more the non "miners". Like getting more by playing certain games, slots or sports. For example in stake you get x3 boost on vip leveling with sports betting. I would expect that they would have revealed if they had something like that, but who knows.

Anyway, i noticed that they have now double VIP level-up rewards when wagering in SHFL. I thought this would cause huge burn rate, as i thought that all lost tokens are being burned, but turns out they are burning only 30% of lost tokens. I guess it's something, but i am little disappointed on that.

What casinos were these?

I don't think i can find that in a sentence, as it's not like they have to specifically offer only "self exclusion", as laws are different all over the world, but many countries have similar customer protection laws, and option for voluntary self exclusion is widely accepted in different countries as a law. And if these casinos want to serve users from these countries legally, they have to comply with their laws and offer same customer protection that they require.

You can google self exclusion or restriction program / act / law and find lots of data. I am not going to list everything i find, it would take ages

https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2016/title-5/section-5-12-71
https://www.liquorandgaming.nsw.gov.au/community-and-stakeholders/community-support/self-exclusion-from-the-casino-and-gaming-venues/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-exclusion

I don't know that anyone would have ever tried to define bitcoin as a security, as it clearly passes the howey test. And since we are in bitcoin section, i won't be talking about government's successful swings against various altcoins. But they have succeeded well with banning mixers. And while people might still use those in the future, it will become more and more problematic as they need to prove the origin of the money in the future, otherwise CEXes will freeze their assets, or at least banks their fiat, if it's related to cryptos with unknown sources.

Blockchain tech in many ways is a success, but as long as we need FIAT money i don't think it's as resilient for political pressure as we thought. But just the fact that people want to use them, forces their leaders to adapt, and at least not totally ban them, because those are their future voters they are dealing with.

And what an earth you are talking about with devaluing FIAT currencies? That doesn't make any sense.

Imho people don't want to admit it because they are often hypocrites. It's against whole cypherpunk ethos to use highly centralized services. While they like to preach about decentralization and privacy it's shameful to admit that they actually use them for fiat ramps, or what ever reason. Might be liquidity too, but i don't see that as a huge problem for big tokens. Unless they are whales that is.

It's also convenient, as they can provide the level of security that would cost an individual a fortune. And people can often access to their CEX account even if they lose the password and 2fa and phone. In comparison, losing your own privatekey is game over for your funds. And many of us lose their important stuff all the time.

And like you said. Cexes are cheap. Especially if you are dealing with eth or something like that. If you aren't rich, it might not be worth it to withdraw them or god forbid use dex for buying and selling. And saving too much money with those can become even more expensive when sales aren't going trough.

That option doesn't hurt though, and casinos are required by law to have it. Obviously it isn't the key issue, but it sends a signal, and that signal is it's ok to seek help, that addiction might not be under your control. It isn't as much as your control as a message it says. Of course you can go around that, and it would be pretty draconian if you couldn't. People are pretty free to do what ever they want, and if they don't want to heal from addiction, no one can fix those problems for us, or stop us really. They can just help. Decision to get fixed comes from ourselves.

But congratz for getting your addiction in order. It usually takes family or other people in close circle, especially if we are in debt.

Majority of the hashpower only does that in theory. In reality no one would just accept that when it was obvious hostal takeover.

All cexes would halt their trading. And this 51% attact couldn't sustain for a long time before counter measures were in place. That chain government controlled would have zero value, because no one would trade those bitcoins. Rest of the users would stick with the prior version before the hostile takeover, because no one sane would support the obvious government intervention chain.

And while you are talking in theory, cost for that hostile takeover would be insane. Not only the cost of the power, but all the miner rigs too.

If you don't believe them yourself, why would you keep them? No one knows if they are going up or not, and if someone claims that they do, they are lying.
Buy things you believe in, so if you make a mistake, at least it's a mistake of your own making, and you can't blame others for it.

I don't judge meme tokens, even if fundamentals are crappy, because i've made more money with bad fundamentals then great ones. I totally understand why you don't believe in meme tokens, but believing in some made up utility of other coins, is even worse mistake in my book. Majority of the markets in crypto are risk investments anyway, and craziest people put most money in. They are constantly aping in on projects that don't seem like a good idea.

So buy exactly what you want, but if you want a suggestion: If you don't understand tokenomics or valuation well enough, stick with the top marketcap coins. Everything else is pure casino.

That's how countries work. You are welcome to look some country that doesn't rely on their people to build the infrastructure from normal taxes. Just don't be surprised when you need to pay high import duties, or something like that because those countries need to fund themselves as well. When you pay taxes, you are ideally paying for working infrastructure, stability and safety.

Tax avoidance is risky, costly and immoral. And it doesn't make any sense if you aren't earning enough anyway. And best part is, you never were independed, as you rely on the infrastructure of the country you were born in. Depending where you live, they can provide different kind of things, but at least ideally it's security, by laws and army. And those things cost money.

Obviously you have you take risks but that's not a way to find potential coins or tokens to invest in a first place. There are hundreds similar charts that looks just as dead as Arcblock was end of last year. So i would have just counted it as one of them, and probably wouldn't bothered to read about their latest development as there are thousands of these to look at. It would just take more time than i have.

So i guess i am interested how you found this and picked from the bottom? Did someone tell you or were you just browsing for random coins in somewhere?

How to explain that you don't how to do analysis without saying you don't know how to do it. Start by explaining that dollar value of single full token is any kind of meaningful metric.
Because it's insignificant and doesn't measure or indicate value by itself. No need to check the guide when this is the headline.

But don't feel bad, this is common newbie mistake. Tokens aren't cheap because they are worth a penny per token. They are cheap when marketcap is low.

Well marketcap went to $350 million, so you were right. But when you are talking about supply you usually refer to circulating supply. If you are talking about total supply you might want to specify that.

Like Bitcoin_arena said, an airdrop could be the reason, but boy this is some ath pump that i wouldn't explain with just an airdrop. I never would have invested into something like this last year but congratz to people who did. Maybe it's time for old steady tokens to pump.

This is a weird hypothetical, as that's not really matter in a long run. Yeah, i understand that new tokens can create more hype but keep in mind that you need to be ready exit early, or at least take off your initial investment as soon as possible. Because many of these are rugs, slow rugs, pump and dumps that benefit only few people, they might have paid hype. And many of them would be considered as unregistered securities if they were risen like pepe. Pepe team was smart in marketing and they didn't break any rules that i know of. Most of these teams have no idea what they are doing and what's legal and what's not. So they never be listed in Cexes like binance.

At some point team realizes this as well and just dumps their tokens, as they know it's not going anywhere anyway. So at some point there will be more hype created by something irrelevant and they perform exit pump.

Desktop only for sports bets, because i somehow my computer and keyboard more when there's some text based clicking, especially when money is involved.
Desktop is also way more faster way to do research and comparison for anything i want to bet. I have 3 monitors so i can keep ton of data in front of me. It's fast and reliable enough for that.

Slots i play with my phone, as those seems to run smooth. I can do other more meaningful at the same time with laptop or desktop. Also phone is way more secure then my desktop (that has some shady software) and laptop is reserved for work only.
 
I used to have tablet, but at the time i found it confusing. These days it might work better but at the time there were all sorts of compatibility issues, errors and crashing browsers and missing data. But i reckon it would be visually appealing to play slots or any clicking based games, as i was totally hooked on several game apps. I might even buy one for that and watching media if i win big this year.