I personally admire a mixed economy, because neither pure capitalism, nor socialism can lead to a good outcome. We’ve seen socialism flourishing in the USSR, and it is clear that pure governmental control, while keeps things disciplined, results in unhappiness in population, poor life quality and lack of progressive ideas because people don’t develop a business of their own, they only obey to the existing rules.

Capitalism, on the other hand, offers freedom, and seems like a great idea, at first, but things are complicated here as well. The problem is that in a capitalistic system rich people have a great initial advantage over the poor, and are open to more opportunities. Thus, known problems arise, such as monopoly, oligarchy, rich becoming richer, and poor becoming poorer.

Thus, IMO, a mixed economy is a great solution to these problems, at least for now. Maybe someday someone comes up with something better.

That’s more difficult than it sounds 
 
That’s why I’d suggest people not do gambling “on a daily basis” at all. When you do something daily it becomes a habit, and habits are hard to let go of (paradoxically, even harder for better educated and disciplined people, that’s why such people are also in the risk group, not only reckless, as many believe). And habits grow into addiction.

The best option here is prevention. I don’t think anyone should gamble daily, or schedule it, e.g. once every 3 days. Just do it whenever you feel like it, sometimes daily, sometimes a week-long break. In such a case, the probability of developing an addiction is significantly reduced.

Oh for heaven's sake, how many times? The mRNA vaccines can’t change your DNA!! Like, it’s not an assumption, it physically can’t!

For mRNA to become DNA you need an enzyme called reverse transcriptase and we, humans, don’t have those (except for in special regions that encode retrotransposons, but that’s a different story and they only work in a specific manner for several sequences)!

To reach the nucleus special signal recognition patterns are also required, as well as special transporter proteins. At last, in order to be inserted into human DNA, you need to get rid of histones that hold DNA together in chromosomes, unravel it (which also requires a set of enzymes and molecular factors), and make cuts in the strand (this also needs to be specifically triggered).

It’s a complex process and even after that, the chances of insertion aren’t that high. Get over it, people! And stop fearing scientists so much, rather fear mass media which spreads so many fakes. That’s where the real horror is…

Volatility is Bitcoin’s great feature, really? High volatility only attracts greedy people, and nothing good can come out of that. With more risk-takers who only see Bitcoin as an income source, it will eventually become a playground for investors. The “natural selection” will work on the market and, eventually, the strongest (aka the richest) will survive price surges and dumps.

Those who favor volatility so much have no ideology and don’t understand the meaning of cryptocurrencies. Eventually, they will switch to shitcoins with higher volatility and smaller market cap, because they only care for money.

Volatility needs to be reduced!

Not really if you run the numbers. Not only we’re not past early adoption, but many countries haven’t even reached that. And cryptocurrencies are meant for everyone, only when it’s available for EVERY person in the world we can talk about adoption, but, as mentioned accurately by @Myleschetty the technology isn’t well thought through for the elderly, blind.

And what of the whole countries imposing bans on crypto? China is a big deal, it has a great influence on the world economy and, not to mention, is home to over 1.3 billion people!

Cryptocurrencies are all over the media lately, big investors are joining the game, which makes it look like cryptocurrencies are everywhere. Unfortunately, we’re not there yet.

The fact that money can stop you suggests that you’re not a gambling addict. Things are different in the case of addiction: nothing can stop that person from gambling (maybe OP is facing something similar). People can have debts worth thousands of dollars, and take even more loans just to be able to gamble.

If there is something that can stop you - it means that you have control over the situation and, probably, could even set certain spending limits for yourself and stick to them.

Yes, team is very important, but this is not always that apparent. Sometimes someone completely unknown with no known background can turn out to be a genius, as well as someone well known can come up with a crappy idea. But generally, yes, if previous projects of the team were successful, these people most likely know what they’re doing.

Good institutional investment, indeed, can attract other investors as well. However, this does not guarantee that the project is good and will succeed. Investors often don’t know the tech behind the project, they mostly care about how much money it can bring to them. Blinded by greed, sometimes they fall for stupid projects or fraud.

It all seemed like a reasonable assumption to me until I reached the point where you describe win chance. As I understand, the main idea is that the website has made some changes after a big win by a certain player to recover their losses - a plausible idea. But the numbers are so insignificantly different: 0.000991 vs 0.000976, do you really think that could’ve helped the website to trick players and make them lose more often?

You also compare the declared winning chance to the real one. I agree, they differ seriously, but that doesn’t have anything to do with the matter. You’ve had no complaints against the website before, right? Even though the winning chance was different from alleged already then.

To conclude, I believe this may be true, but the evidence isn’t sufficient.

It’s hard to tell really. On one hand, yes, there is something cynical in it, why pretend to be generous when you simply make huge money and don’t even bother with taxes? On the other hand, some companies don’t do even that, no kind of charity and still avoid taxes. So, on the contrary, these actions don’t seem to be that bad.

In addition, Microsoft creates numerous working spaces and opportunities for people, helps with career development (I should hope so), improving the life quality of many people. Taxes just go to the government and they know that, while foundations are aimed to help real people in need. So I personally don’t blame them.

Firstly, being able to impose regulations, taxes doesn’t mean control, so the fact that governments are intervening from time to time in crypto affairs to get some profit for themselves doesn’t make them in charge.

Secondly, the interesting thing is that any form of control with Bitcoin is only possible when it’s not functioning as a 100% P2P. No kind of power can prevent people from sending Bitcoin from one electrum address to another. The problems appear when some kind of the third party is present, such as exchanges. Therefore, the governments can ban exchanging, withdrawal, trading, but the network itself, the main function of which is to make direct transactions possible stays decentralized.

Considering your data very well might be related, it would be foolish to assume that Satoshi has done ALL the work by himself, maybe 95%, but he still needed help. But I doubt that it’s him.

First, the styles in which they write are different (spaces, quotes, words in a sentence, etc.). Second, the latter (Pieter Wuille) doesn’t seem to hide his identity. If it took you only 20 minutes to find out this info, don't you think the real Satoshi would’ve been more careful about these things?

Yes, unfortunately, “no KYC” isn’t happening anytime soon in China, they’re all about controlling their nation.

But I’d say that things are a little different in the US. I think it’s only fair to impose taxes on those who make a fortune from cryptocurrencies. People pay those on stocks investments, so why shouldn’t crypto investors pay as well? I think it would be a perfect compromise if other countries would agree to let people use, keep, exchange cryptocurrencies, but in return, people would pay the government. It’s a good trade considering the prize. Do no questions to the IRS. But the SEC seriously needs to calm down and let people have a little privacy!

That’s why I gave two. Gambling with life, or in the stock markets, investment, etc. - is making risky decisions for a certain result. These NFT games, as noted by some here, look a lot like investment, but that’s also a type of gambling.

Games and gambling are different though. Not all gambling is a game and not all games are gambling.

I think we’re far from that point, for now, and there isn’t even a certain answer whether a full replacement would actually be for good, the are many pitfalls here.

I agree that the pandemic has, indeed, served as a catalyst, and we’ve been hearing a lot of news of different global companies adopting Bitcoin, and some of the governments also try to regulate things to make it legal. However, if you count all the countries and establishments that are fond of cryptocurrencies- that would still be a tiny percentage of all. It may take decades for things to change and, keep in mind, that there’s also a highly motivated army of haters, who will serve as obstacles in this course.

The problem is not with the growth, but with the potential use of Bitcoin for making purchases. Imagine it, if there was no fiat, but the price changed, a person would have had to pay double of the regular price for the same item due to volatility because there was nothing to fix the price onto.

But I think there’s no need for fiat to solve that problem. Simply salesman would have to set the internal price of goods/services and make it automatically change whenever the price of Bitcoin would change. It’s very easy.

I agree that these categories of people are often neglected when it comes to new regulations. However, I think there’s always a way out. Even without currency being fully digitalized, living without a smartphone is tough in today’s world, because so many things are much easier and more available with functions and apps that are only present on smartphones.

I personally don’t know a single person that doesn’t use one, even the elderly are learning these technologies now. I think if it comes to this, and normal life literally won’t be possible without using smart technologies, there will be solutions. For instance, for blind people many functions can be switched to voice control: identification, navigation, and, maybe, someday even payment.

Also, I know that some people (rare cases now, may be popular in the future?) insert special microchip implants in their fingers, which allow them to unblock different things and make payments. I know that it is not perfect, but it solves the problem to some extent.

I think, based on your description, it can be considered gambling. The most popular definitions of gambling are:
“Play games of chance for money”. This one, I believe, doesn’t really apply here, because the games themselves aren’t games of chance, right? In those, you can use skills and features in order to advance further.

The other one is “Take risky action in the hope of a desired result”, which is appropriate here. While the game itself is not based on chance, it requires certain investments, and the price of NFTs changes, which makes it risky. Plus, apart from enjoying the game people seek profit here.

So yes, these games are 100% gambling.

Yes, of course, moderators get a monthly salary (or paid weekly/twice a month, that can be individual). The amount depends on the casino, but for full time it shouldn’t be less than $300.
I was once offered such a job with around $580 monthly wage but had to turn it down because of the schedule.

Keep in mind, that the job may include more than just censoring the chat, but resolving issues related to depositing/withdrawal, giving major explanations and advices, etc. Also, the schedule can be pretty overwhelming. For instance, the reason why I refused to take the job was that it required me to be online for 14-16 hours a day, sometimes night shifts. I personally have studying and another steady job, plus I didn’t like the idea that I wouldn’t be able to go out and hang out with friends whenever I want, because of crazy working hours. Of course, you don’t really WORK all these hours, you just have to be around the computer/phone and be able to respond whenever the request comes and look through the chat.

Generally, I think this work would be suitable for people who are in desperate need of money and literally have nothing else to do because to do this effectively you’d need to devote a lot of time.

Any particular reason why?
You seem to favor the idea of Bitcoin adoption, so why not facilitate this process?

You may think that your own refusal to make a purchase won’t matter, but it will, it’s how it works. If you don’t do it - your friends and the friends of your friends, etc. might be less inclined to use Bitcoin as well in the future. If everyone starts acting like it, then Bitcoin will simply become an asset for whales and will lose its meaning as a currency.

I’m not trying to push you to it or something, it’s just that it seems to me that many people have a similar vision and I’m interested in the reasons behind it.

In this particular case, it might have been a coincidence. However, I think some sort of unifying factor may be present here. For both poker and sports betting skillfulness is required, though in sport betting luck plays a big role as well.

So, generally, a person that is more prone to analysis, more patient, more watchful, etc. is more likely to succeed in both poker and sports betting than an average person.

But it should also be taken into account, that there can be a pro poker player that is horrible at sports (or vice versa), in which case, there would be no correlation.