^^ Sports gambling would be far more based on that kind of thought before the bet and knowledge of both teams background.   Actual skill while playing and with active variables would be more like poker and so on and then theres other more luck based stuff that people prefer too where the good judgement or hard work might be in knowing when to take profits I think

Bitcointalk profile link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=124876
Current amount of posts (including this one): 4134
Current amount of EARNED merit: 109
Rocket.run username: STT

I'll check back to see if I qualified and change my sig and avatar

I'm mostly against KYC but its a requirement in some jurisdictions, I dont see how its a great benefit to the consumer.   There is a basic argument it could help in account recovery as the person can use their personal id to reestablish control on an account.
I would also mention a couple of times KYC has been used for profit and removal of funds that belonged to me.  Even after proof of identity was provided the company cited KYC as a reason they would lock money within an account, unfortunately people now associate kyc negatively for experiences similar to that

Its safer physically that is a good point but doesnt mean a loss isnt possible if security is not well kept, various precautions are still necessary to stay safe.
I think China has special areas where tourism to gamble is encouraged and those areas are heavily under government control.    Theres no doubt people across China gamble anyway via a variety of methods including crypto I think is always going to be popular anyway

Gold existed before this world was created, I believe its only possible for this element to occur within a supernova which means no gold has been produced on earth its only here as a left over from the creation of this universe.  Where as things like diamonds are created on earth, even if slowly there is an ongoing source.   Gold and a few elements close to it are rare forever really, I dont think meteors etc are likely
Golds first use was jewellery imo


Both a positive and a negative.  Bitcoin is decentralised, thats its main purpose ongoing to be independent of fixed factors and its far easier to transfer ownership instantly.    Gold is definitely part of the old system of paperwork needing to be filed.   They really arent close, neither is a negative in comparison to the other for me as they do not overlap especially

Its the facebook generation, they like people to know they are following


No BLK listed on that exchange, I was going to suggest that a swap from one to the other would be highly relevant and help create volume.   Not sure if such a trading pair exists anywhere

Its hard to predict anything at the moment except sideways is the trend which means we pass through these predictions and its quite likely nothing happens, at least immediately thats the case.

My take is we are out of an immediate bullish scenario, losing 8 day average -

If we are similar to the past, the rise that already happened is most of the anticipation of the halvening and the actual event is the news ie. buy the rumour sell the news.   That'd be a rough take.
Trading shouldnt be gambling, in that scenario for example there should be a stop loss in case that theory is correct and the half event means a weaker price

I dont wish ill on any country regardless, I hope Venezuela and its people recover to full health.  Certainly it must be frightening for those without power who cannot really survive without modern help, the old and sick obviously are the first to suffer in problems.

But regardless of that, this is why we do not design centralised systems.   They are fragile, they fail at first test of weakness and anywhere in the world can have a natural weather problem or natural occurrence that takes out the power or water or any of the modern conveniences we all rely on.

If PTR had been setup properly under the control of its own protocol and related to the global economy not a military command economy then it might have qualified as a proper crypto venture and be still operating and even helping those suffering this failure now.   THat is the ultimate point of crypto, not to be a cheap trick to get around political difficulties.  It should be improving the worst case scenario, building resilience and allowing alternatives into an economy so we're better off.   Unfortunately this path was not taken, I do not see PTR as being useful and its sad we get an example why crypto should be done properly open to all not controlled by some

Lottery is a voluntary tax in effect, you may win its not false but its certain that the certain proceeds are driven to government.   Crypto could represent emerging markets, new technology utilised to create business but also its represents great risk.   However there is no certain benefactor to crypto, the money is not taxed and the price fluctuates with risk perception and appetite. 

In short, crypto is a natural market good and bad but lottery is a cold deal and its best point in favour would be no real time or thought required to take part.   I much prefer the crypto route and I believe the odds over years are much better

I support this post, I think this may be the sentiment of the market right now.   However my target is 6500 not 5000 as I think that support is a ceiling and also will have a kind of attraction to it where price rises until that area.

Its standard test, retrace scenario.   A bear can speculate this rise and still call for lower later, takes alot to be a trader who can hold both minds and profit from price direction.    I do not know time scale but I guess pre summer, I'd relate it to the 2017 peak

No thats not a requirement, I can send you Bitcoin right now and you can receive it in your own private wallet just fine and no real cost barrier.    All these websites are not bitcoin, they are 3rd party handlers and mostly centralised a weakness to the system.    Convenience is the reason why people take this route but its not an actual requirement.

I could send you bitcoin but why would I, we have to have to gain a reason to trade and that is possible for us to do without vast paperwork and hitches along the way.   I'd agree there isnt enough of that and too much of the website stuff

Why is Bitcoin still up is the exasperation by the majority of commentators outside of crypto.   Its massively up and to describe Bitcoin as down is like staring at your feet while walking, the wrong view point :p     
Good things take time, development is required along the way.   

KYC is best done by outsourcing to a regular firm that has done so for many different companies, that also means they are used to the irregular work loads that otherwise would be placed on a venture such as an ICO.  They will be familiar with all the different factors and various regional differences across the world, it seems unlikely to go smoothly when a new startup which has never tried to do this makes an attempt to verify all fairly.

I also fell victim to KYC, after 14 days they refused to honor their debt on the basis of documents required and absolved this debt in their own favour.  Hardly seems likely to produce a fair result.   At the same time I passed KYC elsewhere with a regular firm

I'd argue its more complex then that, its subject to standard supply and demand.    A big factor is population growth for that particular game, sure csgo items can just be tokens but its base worth is to be used with the game.   So more players is more demand and big thing was it going free to play recently.
The other side is the supply which for csgo I know does go down after a while, the boxes have a peaking kind of circulation to them.   Obviously on first release its very new and nobody has one or its contents.   But also a few years later the boxes do not drop in game, you must buy them from market which can create surprising demand and so on

Well never say never, nothing is impossible imo.   Also I would argue free speech and the right to defend the idea, etc.    I'll have to quote a source on this but government backed and guaranteed profit has very nearly been a thing.   But mostly you are correct, I specialise in merit virgins so I gave 1 :p

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/02/how-mit-students-gamed-the-lottery/470349/



Not sure if its game theory or just plain capitalism but always or guaranteed make a profit is a fallacy unfortunately.    I would still argue it can occur in unpopular, emerging markets, sectors for some time, maybe years.  That lotto thing went on for years apparently though they did make a loss in some instances; longer term it was against the odds to lose with their strategy amazingly, wish I knew

I was reading about the recent changes to DAI and how this raises effective cost of use.    Would it be true roughly to take this as a tightening kind of effect to ETH or is it just to fix parity back to 1 dollar.  Would it likely be bullish for ETH price even.   Apologies if I misread that, I havent been a user of that part of ETH myself

Research to me involves listening mostly to others and the part I play is in deciding how much I listen to one source over another.   Obviously the biggest most conventional source says stay away, crypto is completely unknown and too risky.

Is does depend on your own risk profile whether to engage and by how much of your % worth or spare capital /earnings


Correction is occurring and it will never just be negative pricing.  Its possible to go within crypto and be part of some of the rises during this time even while market decides various factors like protocol itself but also pricing vs FIAT or each other.   Tricky bit is there is no flare fired into the sky when correction is over and we are surely in a bull market.  Just take some of your profits is all I argue for any asset type

BTC only has to allow trade and enable business and increase efficiency and availability to justify itself as a currency.   If its allowing for more trade and business to occur, comparative advantage comes into play which is where the cheapest product of one country or people is made available to those with a higher price and demand for that product.

Both parties benefit and it can be said that BTC enabled trade and increased employment with that trade.   I cant say how often this occurs and critics will say FIAT already covers every scenario but I would disagree on the point of growth especially digitally which is where BTC fits best.

The answer to the question is yes but its harder to say how much is this effect in play

Spike represents inaccuracy in the price and is actually something you dont want long term.   It means volatility which is some discouragement for all and food for the bears to say it was never real.

Do you want the temporary or the permanent rise in usage really, because its far better if it can get a stable base and then any spike from that base in your bullish scenario.   I think we are still forming a base and to think more is jumping the gun.

Could we exceed 20k ?  I think so but I'd prefer if it was years ahead not in months and then another sell