Honestly why would anyone do that, seriously. If you know the odds between multiple people and follow the paralytic odds you need to find something else to do. Enjoy the games for what they are, no need to bet on them cmon.
Does this logic extend to other games, including the Olympics itself? If people want to bet on the Paralympics then I don't see anything wrong with that. After all, it should be treated as equal to any other competition - side bets aren't going to hurt anyone and will only bring more attention to the athletes. Personally don't see anything wrong with giving the Paralympics some well deserved attention. |
|
|
|
Your in profits now if you bought DPET at last May 2021. The price is just $0.4 when I bought lots of it. It means, you don't really have to play the game and is already up by 6 more dollars each. I already took my ROI here from selling some of my DPET coins, just to be sure if something bad happens it will not hurt much.
Although, I still want to see where the game will go that's why I used some to buy pets in game. It is a gamble, that's true and sometimes it depends on the hype it could create to maneuver the value to a its peak.
Asian countries mostly support this kind of industry and if you are seeking to find new NFT gems you will need to follow their trend.
Yeah, there are lots of riches made in the NFT space right now. One of my mates bought 10 Pudgy Penguins when they were just 0.04 ETH each - and now they are more like 2 ETH each for the average ones. I don't think this is sustainable and definitely resembles more of an investor-based-game than any sort of technological revolution. We have known for ages that blockchain is immunitable and can be used to create non-fungible chains of code, but why is it that now people are flocking to buying JPEGs off the internet? Absolutely riduculous if you ask me. With the lack of liquidity, this is as good as gambling. |
|
|
|
My opinion on it is just luck. When the same person or account can win in two different tournaments about poker and sports, of course they have the skills to play both. But still, in my view for example there was me for two different tournaments and winning them, I still think it was luck. Since it's very possible that I'll only get it once and not be able to repeat it again and again from time to time, unless I can keep getting wins in every tournament continuously, then it's definitely a matter of skill. But if it's won only occasionally and not continuously, then I consider it just luck though indeed, I also believe in skill but it won't be perfect without luck.
Yeah, most of it is definietly luck. However, poker and sportsbetting are actually one of the few areas in which skill actually matters. A good poker player has a very sizeable edge over a non-expert, and tipsters can generate positive EV over the long run if they know what they are doing. Anyhow, I would say that there are certainly some overlap in terms of calculating EV, but this is only even relevant for really professional, high level players. Not everyday retail players. |
|
|
|
I am not sure if you are familiar with "Mobile Financial Services" (MFS). But seems in many countries MFS has become most popular. I know it's centralized and shouldn't compare with Bitcoin anyway. As far as I know, a few MFS have been using Blockchain technology to manage their services. And most probably once a day we will discover a worldwide MFS service although it's limited now nationwide. I am just wondering is MFS keeping any roles to prevent Bitcoin growth. I know overall Bitcoin growth is healthy now. But do you believe it would more healthy if there weren't MFS? Although it's centralized but very easy to use everywhere. All the merchants accept it, so you don't need to carry any physical money at all. What do you think?
I definitely think that the fact that there are alternative, centralised means to banking is hindering blockchain adoption to an extent. After all, the mainstream don't particularly care whether or not the thing they are using is decentralised or centralised - that is likely the least of their concerns so to speak. All they care about is convenience, and despite best efforts, the crypto industry's convenience is still lagging behind. To achieve true mainstream adoption, crypto needs to offer a product that the layman simply cannot refuse from a convenience standpoint. |
|
|
|
From what i've seen a lot of streamers were promoting crypto casinos so there's definitely an impact but I feel like this change doesn't have that much effect because they could still promote their links indirectly by using a different platform like discord for example. I guess it's a step in the right direction for twitch as a lot of viewers are against gambling streams but they need to put in more restrictions if they really want to stop scams for good.
Yeah exactly. A lot of streamers have already built up a sizeable following and it's not hard to see that they will simply move to a different platform if Twitch decides to ban affiliate links. Using Discord is definitely an alternative. Mainstream streamers already have these systems in place including proprietary communities that they've set up over the years - doubt this will actually affect anyone in a major way. |
|
|
|
|
Because in the long run, the house always wins?
That is just the cold hard truth. The fact of the matter is that even for events whose outcomes are not determined by the house, the house will always have an advantage over the players through the odds that they set.
You should know this as the gambler. Go in with the mindset that you're going to lose - and you are, over the long run.
|
|
|
|
|
Look, just like the dotcom bubble, I think that crypto is going through a similar phase of mania right now.
It is completely understandable imo. There is still a lack of real world usage cases for bitcoin despite all the traction that we've gained, so its purpose as a speculative asset still stands.
Look at this as a natural progression. It's inevitable that speculation will ensue before any large scale adoption of the asset the way it is intended.
|
|
|
|
|
What do you mean benchmark?
If you mean benchmark as in a support level, I think that we're quite far off from that still.
$50k is a really strong resistance that we'd need to break through in order to regain bullish momentum. This doesn't seem very likely right now, let alone having $48k as some form of lower bound to cushion the falls.
If you are in BTC for the long run, you shouldn't have to worry about this stuff anyway - let the short term do its thing and reap the long term rewards.
|
|
|
|
|
Definitely.
I still think that the current bull run is probably near its tail end despite the best hopes of people trying to call the bottom at $30k. I think that the timing is a bit off for another bull blown bull market since we are already near the 2 year mark from the halving event.
$50k is sort of the reversal level, if we breach that point then we will likely see a huge round of rallies incoming - don't think it's that likely.
|
|
|
|
|
It's an eventuality. Binance will likely follow the paths of Bittrex and Poloniex that went before it.
There is absolutely nothing that CEX's can do when it comes to regulatory pressures. The best that they can do in response is to prolong their existence - but eventually they will come under the regulated exchange bracket. Nothing you can do about it.
The whole centralised exchange industry is sort of subject to this invisible diseconomies of scale - the more you expand, the more regulations you receive, and hence the worse off you are.
|
|
|
|
Looking for .02 for personal reasons. Payback will be .022 and likely much sooner than 30 days, but covering my ass just in case. Repayment will be 10% no matter if it takes 1 day or the whole 30 to repay. Anyone who feels comfy loaning this amount pm me or post here.
Will fill. Please send your address. Loan has been filled: https://blockstream.info/tx/b0d17a8b0252e3711865fb818e9876c2d2a3e2e9a7bf44abbdcca5f9af84c489Repayment of 0.022 BTC by 12/09 to bc1qm0n70gmum4g4mhvexnwk5q0u2saa59uqg8a3u8. Thanks  |
|
|
|
|
My question is how do you expect to be able to maintain the no KYC policy when regulators come knocking?
Inevitably if you expand, you will face a lot of regulatory scrutiny as we've seen with the likes of Binance and Poloniex.
Is there a commitment to stay under a certain size/stay unregulated so that KYC is not enforced, ever? Or will this commitment change with time?
|
|
|
|
|
It makes a lot of sense for retirement funds to be investing in cryptocurrencies, and for regulators to be open for that.
Short term speculation is probably the killer of bitcoin adoption, and something that regulators should disincentivise through taxation policies. Long term holding of cryptocurrencies as a store of value should be encouraged.
In my country, there is a 50% Capital Gains Tax discount available if you hold BTC for more than 12 months - I know the U.S. has the same. Retirement funds essentially lock in these investments for even longer periods and there should be special tax treatment to them too.
|
|
|
|
|
Absolutely not. Bitcoin does not need the support of large institutions in order to survive.
Of course, the more merchants that accept and adopt bitcoin, the better, but no single entity is large enough or powerful enough to say that bitcoin is dead or bitcoin in unusable. The U.S. government cannot do this, so why could any other corporation that is under their direct supervision?
Sometimes market behaviour baffles me.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, not surprising at all.
Binance, Poloniex and Bittrex all offered legacy anonymous accounts and will attract a lot of regulatory attention as a result.
Poloniex is almost a dead exchange anyway, so I'm sure that the founders are just happy they were able to benefit from one phase of the crypto boom and be content with the money that they're getting. The fines aren't actually too large compared to their revenues anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure why anyone is even excited for CBDCs anymore.
Fact of the matter is that they are still fiat currencies, except they may adopt blockchain technology.
Governments absolutely love it because they can track all your moves, all your expenditures and savings. They can also use this system to impose negative interest rates which is obviously not possible with cash.
This is one instance where blockchain technology adoption isn't as positive as it seems, although I do expect the progress to continue.
|
|
|
|
|
I think that people need to start realising that Licensed & Regulated =\= safe.
I'm not saying that btb88 is a scam or anything, in fact there does seem to be quite a bit of people who were able to withdraw funds successfully from the site.
But a license from a known gambling haven doesn't mean much at all. Also, it's important to consider that being licensed means that it is more likely that KYC/AML laws will be more extensive/enforced compared to unregulated casinos, so be aware of that.
|
|
|
|
|
Easy to say in hindsight.
But fact of the matter is that before it happened, or ex ante, no one could have told that this wasn't a bearish move.
This is why TA doesn't work. You could look for patterns all you want, but at the end of the day, how do you recognise whether or not a particular pattern is legitimate or actually noise in the larger picture? It simply doesn't work out that way. Markets are virtually random distributions of outcomes.
|
|
|
|
|
I like this idea.
Dream catcher is one of my favourite games and it is great to be able to see it in provably fair mode.
It would be an absolute shame if OP decided to pull an exit scam, though. Site doesn't seem to be working at the moment which is certainly not encouraging signs. Hopefully hauzenberg is able to withdraw their funds and it turned out that the site was just in unplanned maintenance, though this is becoming increasingly unlikely.
|
|
|
|
|
Depends on the casino.
Some casinos do have moderators as paid positions, whilst others offer a paid monthly salary.
I don't think that I've ever seen a moderator position that would pay for your bills, though. 300 USD a month actually seems quite generous. At the end of the day it's not supposed to be a full time job, it's should just be a side gig for whoever is working it.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
