I don't use any website for my gambling and I can't have interest now or later since I see it as a waste of time. Truthfully, some people claim that some gambling sites and platforms are good predictors when it comes to sports but they are premium services. Now tell me, why would I pay for what I can do myself? That's the situation here and I don't have any regrets about it. I already know how to predict sports and make a very informed betting regarding it.

The information needed is always on the internet, and even if you can't be up to date with them all the time, you can always continue where you left them to review them and use the same predictive strategy you know. It is laziness or the lack of self-belief that makes people rely on that.

For me, I will maintain that luck is always needed in gambling, and most times some people would say it is the prediction of an external source that made a gambler win, it is also the function of luck at that time, the two will always work together no matter how the predictor says he's good at it. Why are those external sources not winning more bets when it comes to the casino aspect of gambling? The reason is more reliance on expertise without luck. We can't just do away with luck in gambling and even if we would listen to external sources for casino betting, we should not do this often and also manage our gambling accounts very well.

Gambling is not so easy to predict but people are better predictors with sports betting. Even at that, we should not see external advice as too precious when we ourselves can even predict it if we are determined to learn the way and act and give it better thoughts and actions. This is necessary because luck can never be left out and even if we pay for any external service, we should still be lucky in addition before it can work as no one is a perfect predictor in anything.

My philosophy is that any game is a game so far it has gaming characteristics. Whether it is being played for the punishment or played for money, what matters is to get the punishment done and the debt paid. However, the punishment assigned to the loser should be reasonable, unlike the way it is being done these days, especially among the youth. They take it to the extreme when it comes to the erotic, alcohol and other dangerous tasks assigned to the losers. That's ill and is not just worth it.

If it is in that company, I prefer the payment option. But if it is such that is being planned by well-mature individuals, it's going to be good because that punishment is the better fun of the game.

Also look at it from this angle, among friends, gambling for the money shouldn't be the main thing as money is not often the main goal in some cases as it will never enrich the winner(s) but for the friendship fun to be derived amongst them.

This is a very good narration and is similar to the ones I've explained in the past on various VPN and multiple accounts allegation threads. Well, we are getting wiser daily and only inexperienced gamblers should be entrapped in this issue again. If an experienced gambler still falls victim, it could only be an affront and foolishness that causes that. We know now that casinos frown so much on VPNs and multiple accounts, is it not better to avoid the two strictly to save our heads?

Fine, some people are merely victims of this due to the use of VPN or even their local dynamic IPs. Still, in this case of dynamic IPs, I believe it would be a limited number of customers that would have the same IP clashed, which the casino may still further investigate to know the truth that it is not from the same person judging by how to gamble. But still, some casinos would use that to cheat the customer, this is certainly unfair. But it is the customer who puts it up himself when his local IP can't access a casino but still forces himself to use a VPN to access the casino. Is it a Must you gamble with them? I believe we should always weigh our options and the risks associated with them before we risk them.

You probably might have viewed this from a different angle from mine, and of course, Bitcoin ATM is not useless, I never said that. But this is a means that people transact Bitcoin and part ways with an insane amount of money. Since there are better alternatives that would save you more money, won't you go for it? Even an above-average person would weigh their options, which conceived what I wrote.

That's more reason why I added a rich country because, in rich countries, people might still want to sacrifice the charges, not that it doesn't pinch them at all, but because they have good statuses which makes it sacrificeable. Upon that, the charges will still reduce the number of patronage of the ATM machines in the rich countries compared to though there were no high charges attributed to it. How much more in developing/underdeveloped countries?

I can assure you that it would be worse in those countries because almost everyone would prefer the better alternative channels because they would believe that the charges are even enough to do better things with their lives than to sacrifice it on a Bitcoin ATM. Now tell me, what is the use of Bitcoin ATMs littering the country abandoned? It is better to put it in the country where it will be in regular use and not left redundant.

Yes, you are getting the point, but I would rather call KYC a necessary evil that we must obey. Just like the debt we must pay or sacrifice just for the sake of the sanity of the world. If you agree with me, many years after the internet had started and companies were being patronised newly online, there was no immediate request for the KYC. However it started over time due to what the world has turned to, and it is so important so that the company you are dealing with and you who are dealing with the company can be accountable for it. Should the case something happen, it would be easy to know what to do when it comes to tracing and all that.

However, it is a means that can reveal our identities as well, which is the only valid issue people always point to. Because such identities revealed to the company through the KYC could be leaked, thereby compromising our privacy in one way or another. Nonetheless, once you are a centralised company, you must obey some regulations and rules, unless you are not answerable to any country or authority. This kind of arrangement will even make customers wary of such companies and might reduce patronage which can bring about liquidity to the companies that aspire growth.

Bro, above all reasons, sentiments, wants and wishes, your country must come first. Damn what the citizens are saying about it or the benefits they get from Binance, the exchange cannot reap from the country and not remit the needful taxes for the benefit of the country. It is either they allow the fortune to be well distributed among the concerned parties, or they forget about the relationship with your country. It is never too much for your country's government to ask from an exchange. But it was certain Binance didn't want to cooperate with them after giving them enough time and even extending the grace by an extra month. They seem to want to gain ALL which is so selfish.

Also, they might be afraid of the money laundering activities that could be uncovered if they allow the country's government to oversee a lot, which is normal. You can see what is happening with the US branch of exchanges and how they uncover a lot of cheating, price manipulation and illicit financial flows. I wonder how rotten the global branches of these exchanges would be. It would be so unspeakable, is this what a responsible government would allow to be going on unabated despite having a link to their country?

The daring nature of some people makes them opt for such odds, but this is certainly not wise and shows overconfidence which is not a good characteristic of a gambler. Also, such odds come with tempting assurance because no one will bet on that kind of poor odds except that it will be an almost certain outcome for them. But they often neglect that an almost-certain outcome is not a certain outcome, so even if the possibility for the gambler to win the bet is 99.95%, such should know that the 0.05% possibility of losing it could be catastrophic and could actually be the outcome at that time.

This is why we should be sensible and going for higher odds with a very reasonable amount of money is the right approach here. I see mainly two issues in the betting of that guy, and they are Wrong betting decisions and Improper management. Aside from the lame option, no one should bet that huge amount in a single bet just like that, it is wrong. He should have divided it into at least 10% ($140,000 per bet) in my opinion, which could have saved his head better in a situation like this.

And you think it would be easy to solely depend on casinos for a living? It is always good and deceptive in our thoughts, especially when the person has a primary job, but the moment the person stops that job for gambling, the issue starts and it's going to be a serious problem with time. The psychology at which you are gambling when you are still falling back at your primary job as the main source of income is not the same as you would be gambling when it is no more, that's why it is not the smartest decision to be gambling for a living without having anything to fall back at. This is especially true when you are a family man and someone who has extended dependents. It will be a whole lot of headaches at that time when there are pressing financial needs where gambling will be your last resort. Depending on gambling in such a situation will only cause desperation and frustration and you will likely lose your money.

Besides, Bravo! You are doing well in gambling. For someone to be earning so hugely in gambling to the extent that the mean earning of the country is still lower than it, that is convenient. But I will never advise anyone towards it. I also read your post a while ago that you reduced your gambling pace just because of your job. That is a very good idea, the job that pays you more and gives you the rest of mind as the reward of your work is best to be taken seriously. Just continue to bet in your free time the way you do it, it is the best and shows you are wise. Don't be tempted because if you can gamble with higher amounts and your gambling results are as good as you claimed, then you may still earn more than your present status. But don't just think it.

I understand the school of thought you are bringing this from and I love it as well because the two of them (casinos and exchanges) are dealing with people's deposits and withdrawals. However, to buttress your points, there are many financial services and payment gateways doing this even before online casinos came into operation, and they still do this now. These are companies with the highest level of regulations operating in strict countries like the UK, US and Europe. This is possible because it is allowed by the rules of their regulators to provide a limited financial service for a particular customer/client without verification, and just as you explained what exchanges do, these companies do such as well.

There will be limitations to the amount they can transfer and there can be a certain grace time they can go without verification. This also varies depending on the transaction of the customer/client, the country of residence and how suspicious the customer is. These 3 factors are important and could prompt what many call unjustified calling for KYC completion by casinos, neglecting that the casino they are dealing with is not a no-KYC type. I simply see no fault in any regulated entities calling for the completion of KYC at any time, so far they are regulated and have not advertised no-KYC to you, just know that it might only be a matter of time if you do not do it now, they will ask you to complete it later.

I remember vividly that I answered a question like this year, I don't know why it is now common for tax reasons. People should pay their taxes. One thing that keeps ringing in my head is whether the people who want to close and reopen accounts think Binance or any other centralised exchanges they want to do this with are foolish. First, just because you closed your account doesn't mean they do not have your log files and transaction history. If you reopen the account, maybe it will not show immediately/automatically (I've not experienced it before, but I am sure that the Binance system will detect it).

But when it warrants questioning and the investigation is on, there is no way this will not be unveiled. This is unless you are opening the account with a different name and identity. If not, do not just cause issues for yourself. Mind you, as I write, do you think the incidence is not happening already where the exchange would know that people are doing such for that purpose? This is a tax evasion reason that both Binance and your country's government would frown at. Meaning it is illegal, so why try to do illegal things? You should learn from those caught in the past and are severely punished. If you earn, please pay truthfully to your country, that's my advice.

You raised a valid point there and I believe everyone should know that past events are not indicative of future happenings, so we should enjoy the reviews while they last, but it can't always say of the company in question. This is why I also watch out for the date of reviews, not that I will just be reading them and believe that they can still always be valid and preserve the doings of the casinos I am dealing with. If it has been more than 6 months, I might be sceptical to believe in it, but still, the main thing I watch out for in reviews are the core dealings of the casino and how they professionally and sincerely serve their customers.

Even if they've updated their terms and conditions as you pointed out, the new person trying to review them for him to open an account should know that it is part of his responsibility to read the terms and conditions to be updated about the said company. By doing that, such must have saved his head and knew the things they added or subtracted from their service. For this, the terms and conditions are not even the main issues but the fear of formerly reputable casinos at a time turned bad. This often happens and I have at least 3 examples I can cite in the trading and investment sector. They were the best before, but after gaining prominence and a very large customer base, they started misbehaving.

Gambling should be a personal thing, so the advice given to the OP and the one you issued are both good. The more we listen to what people say about it, the more we are doing ourselves no good, especially for the negative advice towards it and the confusion some people could cause when we select our games in their presence. Also, we should always know that gambling is a two-way thing, it is either we win or lose, and no matter how we play it, this subsists still, so we should not be overconfident about it but be more managerial. Ours is to find the right casinos and sportsbooks to do our thing and find the means to preserve the responsible gambling characteristic in what we do. This calls for viable experience towards it even as we gamble with care. The experience should however be helpful in selecting reputable casinos and helping us to gain the needed style, management and the right psychology for this. These and a few more are the only things needed to be a better gambler, and particularly, we should make sure that we are independent in our gambling. That's just the best.

I must say that I love what the government of the Philippines is doing, the situation is similar to that of Nigeria but the steps taken by the Philippines' government are mature and polite. This is the right way to tackle the situation, unlike the Nigerian government's approach. I've said it, if my government handled the situation well to demand their right in the right way, I will be the first to support them and stop using Binance immediately even if they do not block access to their domain. The Philippines' government had tried enough to give it time even though it may not be appropriate to include the US government in this context. It is their right to make Binance or any other companies accountable just like what the US did. This will help them to know the inflow and outflow, curb money laundry and be able to get their correct tax.

Not that the company will earn big from the citizens and give the government nothing, that is bad. Now, the awkward thing is that, just like yours, they banned the domain in my country but the app is still working. That's ill indeed. Till today, I still have access to the Binance app despite my country's ban of the Binance domain for over a month.

I don't think these casinos can be in the category of 1xbit, they should be worse. But still, this is indeed unfortunate and I hope that one day the whole situation will change. It pains me to read that someone is scammed by certain casinos or any other online companies, and in most cases, these companies would do this without any penalty or anyone to question them. It should not be like this, it seems the government turns a deaf ear to the cry of the voiceless. Maybe in the future, someone like me will be one of those who will put the attention of the government to it.

The government are just looking in the other direction, if they want to do this, I think they can, just like the INTERPOL and international security agencies. They can even bring it out from the UN for global cybersecurity and sanctioning where the whole world would cooperate and continue to investigate, locate, close down and sanction companies doing this scam plainly.

Who issued the curse if I must ask and who will break it? I don't see it as a curse but a manmade/man-caused problem that is plaguing the economy and welfare of people in an economy. Inflation and economic hardship are not even the same thing because a country could be facing inflation but still not poor/economically challenged, and with the right handling and policies by the responsible government, they will get out of the woods pretty fast. In many cases, even when inflation is bitting hard, the level of unemployment could be so minimal. In this situation, if it is a good country where the system is well planned and working fine, the citizens/residents could only be feeling the pains of paying more but would still have the money to pay for their needs and also have excess to save.

You can see in this situation, there is no economic hardship, but people mistake inflation for this which is not an automatic correlation. Above all, if there is inflation and/or economic hardship, we should try to live within our means, and if we feel the economic inconvenience, we should increase our source of income.

Do not say that, BTC can move below any price, we should not be too rigid that something can't happen even if it looks so. If Bitcoin can move upward about $20,000 in just a month, it can move downwards even more depending on the cause and the situation of the chart. But for now, this is not feasible even as I believe that if Bitcoin can maintain the hold below $67,629, it can be in trouble, especially if it is moving lower and maintains a bearish trend when the halving happens. Though this may not happen, the fact that Bitcoin moved as high as it is now before halving, anything opposite or unplanned could happen after the having, so we should get prepared for the worst to happen.

Like I always say, our trading charts should be the main guide in this regard instead of speculating randomly with nothing to back it up. It is best to let us know the right thing to do at that time because what we are saying now is mere guesswork, we can continue to use that to refresh ourselves about the latest market condition as it's for better guidance overall. Going forward, I do not see Bitcoin moving lower than $60,000 myself, still, I just spotted a daily chart of Fibonacci support at $65,321. The level has been instrumental in making sure that Bitcoin did not slip below it, nonetheless, let's see how it goes over time. A breach below it might be so devastating for Bitcoin even as it might make it move to $60,000 or lower if the price action is negative and the sentiment is also strong enough to cause havoc.

The guy never mentioned DCA and I do not think he is referring to that at all in all of his explanations to have warranted. This is just a random investment explanation that has nothing to do with trading as well because traders can buy and sell the market at any time and make their money. This is unlike investors that will be very careful to avoid striking the market at a low price which could become an issue later in the future. Now, about the buying of Bitcoin at any how price, it could cost the investor if care is not taken. The best is to strike the market when it is low and dump it if possible when it is too high. But first, you should know the reason why you are making such decisions and not just deciding anyhow.

For me, my chart is always my guide to know when to buy and sell, but certainly, those who are buying Bitcoin at the ATH may not necessarily be called foolish but are not smart in the investment. They are ill-informed, and that reminds me, in the last bull run, many people who bought Bitcoin close to $69,000 and lost so much started tagging cryptocurrency as bad, just because they were poorly advised by bad investors who were just lucky to gain from Bitcoin but did not know how the market works. We should be smart investors, and at the current price of Bitcoin, if I were anyone, I would never buy it to HODL but trade it which has nothing to do with whether or not is high or low.

Any trader can still gain in such a situation because the market is highly unpredictable, it could move more. But for the investment part, the reward can't really justify the risk anymore when buying at the ATH.

Maybe you are new to the world of cryptocurrency, I do not know, but swapping your SHIB for LTC is not a smart idea in my opinion. At most, you should have just bought a small amount of LTC. I must say that I was so particular about the LTC years back but when I carefully studied it, I realised that it is good for sending and receiving money and not for investment. Not that the investment will not be yielding with it but it can't yield as some more volatile coins/tokens would. If you compare how SHIB and LTC behaved since mid-last year till now, you should be able to know enough about what is happening and what will happen in the future.

And during the altcoins season judging by the past, the coins and tokens like memes are powerfully moving up. This is what I believe should be your primary target, and not just for doubtful investment and ETF reasons. The ETF we are even talking about can't be as impactful for any coins again as it did for Bitcoin last year. The reason why it behaved like that was that the ETF was introduced newly to the cryptocurrency world which makes it such impactful. But as it is, the ETF has not yielded any good results for Bitcoin ever since then in terms of the huge money brought in practically, only that the headlines, rumours and FOMO mainly caused the impact then.

Yes, of course, it concerns me, and if not for my money, but for the money of those who would be their next victim. You can imagine those ones who have had issues of insolvency in the past, what happened to them? Till today, it is promises upon promises, but still, they've not redeemed it and people's money has been trapped ever since then. This is bad, I do not wish it for anyone. But the issue of Kucoin and any others that the US government charges or found guilty of misappropriation and money laundry is not a huge one because the worst is for the brains behind it to be jailed and the company fined just like what happened with Binance and CZ.

Even if they were charged much, the US government is responsible enough to ensure the safety of the company and their customers, so they will not enforce the compliance of the charges in a manner that will cause liquidation. The company will be okay, it is not the first time that companies would be charged with money laundry and I do not think there are so many global companies dealing with money can be exonerated from that.