This is a non-issue for casinos in my view.
There's very few of them that have zero KYC and among those you'd still have to find the ones that are pretty permissive with how they let you withdraw.
Most require to withdraw on the same currency after wagering your whole balance. But even if you find a casino that has no wager requirement for deposits...
So you deposit in a casino and withdraw back your BTC. What now?
Casino addresses are pretty easy to identify. So unless this casino has some epic volumes in the currency of your deposit, it's still possible to kind of approximate your address of destination. That's because casinos don't particularly deploy and coin mixing techniques. Just bi virtue of depositing to a custodial address and withdrawing to a new address doesn't mean that you have completely closed your trace. It might help a little on that regard, but is no mixer.

I don't think "prediction" platforms are valued any more than just any run in the mill sports discussion.

Just go in any thread here where fans discuss their opinions on a league, you'll get an idea of what the sentiment might be and perhaps some details.
Listen to the news about a team, see some pre-game shows. No matter how much someone claims to be an expert, no matter how he follows these, it's just not realistic to expect reliable predictions from anyone.
I'd just stick with discussions to be honest, they're more fun and if actual "predictions" have no value, at least have some fun ey?

Interesting that BC has moved to address many of not all of the public accusations.
Either paying back what they owed or coming to an agreement in many cases.

Although in this case, I see BC voided some big wins claiming an exploit, in spite of fixing it, but refused to provide an eplaination. And the OP still claims that he should be entitled to the winnings instead of just the deposit amount.

Nevertheless good for BC, but some transparency in certain cases like the one linked above would help better their image even more.

I don't think it would be meaningful to try and "mix" coins through a crypto casino. First of all, many casinos these days require KYC, and even those that don't might require it seeing a large withdrawal.
Unlike dedicated mixing services, casinos do actually make efforts to answer to some state authorities, albeit not all of them I guess.

And on the other hand, casinos will usually require a deposited balance to be wagered before deposit. So really it doesn't make much sense. Risking to lose all your balance over some mixing?
There will be better ways to do this and even in a decentralized manner.

Already this whole discussion of money laundering through centralized platforms will be entirely irrelevant due to better technologies existing, but states will still find a way to impose sanctions on them just because. Let's not do them the favor of accepting their approach to things. In any case, most of the world's money laundering happens through banks anyway.

Damn, Olympiacos being in a tie even with a red card against Volos is a very upsetting result.
Surely very far from whatever anyone would have foreseen. I was expecting a boring match with just a goal or two scored by Olympiacos but the end result was very different:


Olympiacos even got 3 yellow cards...
And managed to only end up in a tie even with Volos missing a penalty.
Probably the game ended up in a tie just because Volos scored an own goal!? Olympiacos didn't even score for the entire match after 54'.

To be fair though a goal of Olympiacos was canceled after a VAR. I wonder how different platforms would treat a canceled goal. Whoever took the bet they can let us know.

O)))

Are we not counting transaction fee discounts as discounts now?
I thought it was pretty standard bitcoin functionality by now, enough for most users to understand how they work.

For taking more block space, these transactions pay less fees (by the actual space). They unit is called vBytes because the fee is accounted in VIRTUAL bytes.
So, if that's not a discount, what should we rename this as?

OFI as I've posted above has disappointed me. I mean yes, it's my team but when it comes to money you've gotta win sometimes 
So judging by past performance, I'm really betting against my team now.

As of Aris' matchup with AEK... Well it's a tough one. AEK is performing very well on the local league, but did not do so well in Europa League.
That's pretty much also true for all Greek teams in Europa League also but the difference here is that Aris won their previous match against Panathinaikos, who currently ranks first!
While that was surely an upset, Aris surely proved that they have some good underdog strength this season. They'd have their chances for a win against AEK maybe so it's not that certain of a bet when betting for a win for me.

Can you name anyone actually working on the Terra Classic ecosystem?
Who's writing the code and implementing the proposals?
How are they funded? How are they organized?

The answers to all these questions are very fuzzy.
It seems like there's a lot of speculation but very little actual information on these coins.
If you were lucky enough not to hold them so far, I would advise against investing anything. They're only good for very short term trading for their volatility. Nothing more imho.

Good navigation on the site, fast loading but most importantly...

I like a site to have good odds and my niche of game to play. For instance, as one of the gamblers in the space that has actually gotten accustomed to many of the older games, I like crypto dice the most.
The other games I like are crash and blackjack is hard to do right.

Overall though, all these games can be done with provable fairness, which I find really important for me to play any such game.

The other thing I dislike with sports betting sometimes is when my bets get rejected because outcomes might have changed slitghtly after I pressed the button. I want to be able to set a bet as soon as I press the button. So if sites work fast with this I rally like it and I consider it important to keep playing.

I'm not saying that miners should block anything.
Actually, they can do whatever the hell they want.
And that's what has been happening anyway.
In fact there's very little about what we can do about other people's hash power anyway.

But the argument about including ordinals in blocks because it makes the most economic sense doesn't seem to actually make too much sense from what I see.
At a time of high transaction congestion, a block template that made space by excluding ordinals to replace them with many more smaller transactions, would likely get similar or perhaps even higher fee rewards.
So all I'm saying is that in the end it doesn't make much of a difference economically probably.
But I'm not the one that came up with this argument actually, so the burden of proof lies with the accuser.

I never allow the machine to pick numbers when I'm playing lottery.
Why should I trust it more than my own intuition?

Especially if I'm playing a small number of rows, I see no point.
But the chances of getting the lottery are very small anyway, so it'll probably not matter either way.
But just in case, I would never allow the machine to pick. Nobody tells me it's not backdoored.

Welp, that's the magic of it, results can be unpredictable at times!

Here we are with a new matchday now though:



My predictions are on wins for:

PAOK
Olympiacos
Panathinaikos

Because sometimes you have to go with the more secure ones.
Odds aren't the best and I'm still contemplating if I should make this a multi,

But I think it's hard to go wrong when the matchups are so uneven.
Good luck!

How do some ordinals transactions get a 75% discount?
Idk, maybe you can look at the tx I linked, hover over the green text saying "SegWit" on mempool.space and verify it yourself to tell me as also. (77e996de08c48ed282a7b8bc88ca199712a15fa68babb10a0b3ee760674cf21b)

Do non-ordinal transactions regardless of address type get the same discount? Probably not as they don't throw as much data in the blockhain.

The dynamic that is created here is that you get a transaction that is considered to be paying optimal fees, while actually grossly underpaying for the space it takes in a block.

Look at the stats for the provided transaction:

‎Size          19.99 kB
Virtual size ‎5.07 kvB

75% discount means the one making the inscription actually pays for what can count as an acceptable optimal fee transaction on the Virtual size instead of the actual space it takes.

I feel like you're not answering my main question. Maybe I'm dumb, so let me dumb things down (for my own understanding).

On the point of Ordinals making sense to include in blocks:
I presented a transaction where an ordinal gets a 75% discount.

I was then told anyone can utilize these discounts.

But it's only ordinals that utilize the discounts to that extreme by essentially tricking the system.

---

So tell me in the end, with these massive discounts, does it make more sense financially for a miner to actually include an ordinal inscription or to include non-incription transacitons that don't abuse fee discount mechanisms?

Yes, anyone can utilize fee discounts, but who's actually going to ABUSE them?
Someone transaction BTC from address A to address B, or someone uploading entire JPEGs on the blockchain?
That's the thing that matters on this issue.

This makes little sense.
Astroturfing is a thing.
I can PRETEND not to be affiliated with a service, and still promote it.
Especially with mixers, there'd be a high incentive to do it since they're very starved of visibility.

Do we want bitcointalk to be a hub for mixer promotion while they come under increasing regulatory scrutiny?
Probably no.
If your assessment is that bitcointalk should not be associated with mixers and you want to stick with it, the OP proposal makes more sense.
Not saying that it's ideal, but priorities have to be set straight.

Leaving the window open for abuse always means that there will be abuse at some point.

We have to think, why did satoshi exhaust his genius to build a trustless system for cash payments?
1. Money moves the world.
2. With financial incentives, it's easier to balance incentives.

When parties in a network have a financial interest to do their job right, this also acts as a disincentive to make mistakes, so the network is less likely to collapse.

Ok, so incentives are important. What would the incentive in a decentralized social network or forum be then?
Tough questions to answer.  
Many smart minds after satoshi have contributed towards creating decentralized social platforms, but all have so far failed to achieve widespread use AND censorship resistance at the same time.

Let's not kid ourselves. There is plenty of progress alright.

I understand that slow progress might be hard to notice in a fast moving space, but the progress on privacy and decentralization is still constant.
Think about it, going to Turkey for instance (along with many other countries), you'll see a booth to exchange FIAT for crypto in every other corner.
Adoption is making tremendous progress.
Under this setting, it's easy to transact in whatever way you like with crypto and never be noticed if you're careful.

10 years ago this would have been unheard of.
10 years ago also some individual got life in prison for running a free (as in freedom) peer to peer marketplace with bitcoin payments.
This hurt bitcoin's reputation tremendously.
These days, even though the "notorious" side of the economy has grown, it's peanuts compared to the whole crypto scene. That's because of how much the "legitimate" side has grown. And maybe things need to stay that way if we want growth.

It's not like we can't use btc and crypto platforms to transact in any way we want and do whatever we want. But maybe it doesn't currently help our cause to discuss such use cases in bitcointalk.org on the clearnet.
Give it a few years, with progress people will start seeing through the tyranny of the current financial system and governance structures at increasing rates.

Once the majority of the population realizes that buying prescription medicine from abroad to be able to afford to live (as many people use crypto for) is not a crime as it's characterized to be, compared governments freely getting to finance murderous wars abroad, maybe then we will not even need mixers.

Till then, we can work within the system's tolerances, grow, and if we don't trip and fall on the way, think about how we'll do big moves once time has matured.
Alas, changing entire systems isn't something that happens magically and we'll need more than just bitcoin. But bitcoin is surely a good tool. We need to use it wisely.
I think we can be confident that a revolution will happen within our lifetimes.

We could though, and in fact I don't see why not.
The merit system was put in place to prevent spamers from reaching high ranks with ease as it was possible before.
Inaction against merit abuse just makes it easier for them to get around any meaningful restriction that it imposed.

The U.S. isn't Draconian, it's actually very permissive.
We all know that in Europe people have gotten sued over online posts and even lost their cases and had to pay damages, even for saying the truth.
Apparently hurt feelings in many jurisdictions are fair game to go after someone.
Bitcointalk enjoys freedom in that it's a forum where you can say anything about anyone, and just lay it out to the court of public opinion without fear of it being taken down.
There exist VERY few public forums that allow completely free and uninterrupted discussion of people and ideas.

And besides, it's not just the website location that matters. The whole value that bitcointalk can provide is based on the fact that there's active staff maintaining it.
And it's their jurisdiction that matters most. Like, we can't expect anyone to migrate to Russia for simply running a forum. That's not realistic. And it's also unlikely that this would allow more freedom of speech.

So if governments today consider that mixers are helping facilitate illegal and harmful transactions, why should our moderators be caught in the crossfire?
We did notice from a past mixer thread that was shut down for instance, that user assets were frozen on Binance for simply having been paid through a signature campaign... And this is just a small example. There's no need for forum members to come under such serious regulatory scrutiny with sanctions. Because it was obvious that large part of this forum's userbase was actually receiving payments from mixers. And even if users are willing to take that risk, I'm pretty sure nobody in the west can risk hosting a forum where large parts of its userbase are under sanctions.

In the long term I'm pretty sure keeping the forum alive, its administrators and staff out of jail is more important than going to ridiculous lengths over any ideal. We don't have the strength in numbers or means to fight governments as of right now. Buuuut... One must also consider that governments are actually one step behind, not ahead. What we do have, is the technological advantage.

Mixers could only be shut down because they're fully centralized and trust based. But there already exist trustless and decentralized ways to mix coins. The use of which will likely increase a lot, and with use, also comes increased interest to fund and improve these technologies.