Choose to believe what you want to believe! The problem of other minds is a tricky one to resolve but a skeptical approach is a very pragmatic one.

Better to ask in specifics and create threads for fueling discussion. Simply creating a thread like, "I'm new, where do I start," creates a very general discussion that doesn't pertain exactly to your informational needs. If you are exact in your questioning, then you will find yourself much more knowledgeable than if you were to ask questions to which you have already encountered similar answers.

This also helps to drive down spam because we don't need to see "buy low sell high" for the umpteenth time.

Not only that, but this feels like another degen gambler rant. Ever notice they always seem to have a problem with the fact that they lost, and are trying to rationalize the very probabilistic outcome with some universal evil, or someone out to get them? "These casinos are scammers" or "not provably fair, rigged!" always says much more about the person than about the casino they are playing at.

Just because it's a rare event doesn't mean it can't happen, and sometimes, you get unlucky. Too bad, OP.

Usually, the coin lays it out bare. If it doesn't have any details on the distribution, then you can be sure to raise that red pennant and say "stay away" because a lack of transparency (and/or open-source code) can easily lead to centralized and unfair systems within the network or coin/token protocol.

You don't want to see any 30% premine coins. Those are usually dumped immediately after their price is anything slightly significant, which should lead to a lack of incentive to invest. Even if a coin is legitimate, many prospective investors will be very hesitant to take a look at premined coins.

Let's be honest here: if you're running a casino, you're not really out to 'help' people necessarily. It's the creation of a zero-sum game. And when certain casino owners get particularly overzealous (999Dice, looking at you) the provably fair mechanisms may start having some issues.

Users should just be very aware of how the systems work and what can affect the actual fairness of games. I haven't written anything on when 'provably fair' is problematic since that is something for when you are more cognizant of how provably fair gambling actually works.

I suggest that you adjust yourself to the rules of the forum: double-posting or even any consecutive posting at all is disallowed. You can check the rest here.

I think it's kind of disappointing to see you continually raging about. Did you forget that you agreed to the terms (regardless of how scummy they may or may not be)? Learn the lesson of reading before you sign.

I believe these sites should have a "provably fair" section where you can check for the site's advice regarding the topic. I haven't played on any of these sites yet so I'm unfamiliar, but if someone else wants to chime in with direct explanations then they should do so.

If they have some source code, you should be able to pull it up and use an online compiler - or hopefully one they provide on-site - to just run the verification on your own. As long as the result aligns with the server and client seed you were provided (hopefully with a nonce or some other randomization), the bet was provably fair.

It may seem quite high, but do be aware of the logistics of how a digital network for financial assets would work. In a decentralized setting, there needs to be a cost associated with the transfer and verification of information. Thus, it is packaged and stored and has a respective size associated with it - those would be the various input transactions that give your wallet its balance. What is interesting, though, is that the size does not necessarily reflect the value of the transaction: there may be some wallets that send out transactions with only one input transaction, but its value could be anything from 0.001 BTC to tens of thousands of BTC.

So, then, let's think about what situation would make it such that the market forces have created very high fees: a high demand in transactions. The mempool that Pmalek referred to is just that: the pool of which broadcasted transactions are taken from. Then, miners (assuming rationality and maximization of BTC) would mine the transactions starting from the ones with the highest fees. What is happening when the fees that your client/service charges per transaction increases? The global demand for output transactions is high, and has been high for some time!

"Lesser known coins" are 99% of the time utter shitcoins. Avoid most if they don't have something groundbreaking, because otherwise you're probably looking at another copy-pasted clonecoin that can go fork itself with the rest of 'em. Always be sure to use the "if it's too good to be true" principle when you're looking at very optimistic remarks. There is always a catch somewhere.

YouTube accounts have been doing those scam streams for a very long time - if you think that's China, best take a seat and get used to the status quo! Though it's possible that it is a foreign power that is doing this kind of attack, I don't think it's wise to discount the very simple explanation of "some nerd found an exploit" because if you have ever worked as a programmer in a large company, then you know how trash things are. Who's to say that it wouldn't be like the Equifax incident? Someone fibbed something here, fucked something there, and then boom: huge problem.

Masks don't necessarily help you prevent the disease, but they certainly do help you prevent others from catching your disease.

Did you think that the whole point was to save yourself, rather than to prevent the spread of disease? Well, now you know.

A lot of websites will have a "verify" box or something similar on their platform where you can check to see if a bet is, in fact, fair accordingly to their policy.  Which website have you been playing on, by the way? This will give us an opportunity to better direct you towards the option.

A few sites will lay out the open-source code for you to see how the bet results are generated, which is another useful way to verify the provably fairness.

Provably fair mechanisms allow for you to verify the bets yourself: what happens is that you are given a hash (encrypted message) of what the website may use to create the result of the specific bet you are placing. For example, I know that Primedice uses a server seed/client seed system where you're given a hashed server seed and where you can input your own client seed: this gives you the option to make sure that you are not being manipulated or that your bets are not being changed in any way to lean in the site's favor.

I would recommend looking into it - it's a pretty cool part of cryptography.

Low volume, which also contributes to a feedback loop. The lack of incentivisation to post in the Off-topic sections because of signature campaigns further fueled its lack of activity, thereby creating more incentive to stop paying for posts in the section.

This may be true, but you're comparing a piece of shit with another piece of shit. At the end of the day, none of those boards offer anything of particular value.

Few signature spammers care about merit. Most of the people who are looking to 'farm up merit' are non-established members that think that ranking up is a much easier process than what it actually is. Thus, they think about merit much more than they think about their 'current earnings' in their 'signature campaign job'. What they do care about is post counts, especially in areas where they will count, though.

This is a bit of a necrobump but since you have a similar issue, it shouldn't be too big of a deal.

Considering the fact that OP has yet to make a response on this issue and has since moved on to another sportsbook (or that's what it seems, judging by their post history), I don't think the result is one that you will be particularly happy with.

This is the most recent post regarding Sportsbet.io:


Not great.

Unfortunately, some of people who repeatedly fall for the schemes simply lack the capacity to create the pattern of the scam format. They may get scammed and fail to learn from the very situation that led them to financial ruin, only to subsequently fall for the same type of mechanism. Most would agree that if you simply don't send out any Bitcoins, you're at very little risk of losing them.

I'm certain that almost everyone has encountered a con or a simple "double your money" scheme. I'm also certain that most have learned from the incident... but for those who don't, they're the "whales" of the scam trade.

A harsh lesson in the matters of ToS and agreeing to contracts that you don't fully read.

I think you are still feeling frustrated from significant net losses, and that's fine! Your lack of maturity and constant deflecting and dismissive nature will surely rectify the losing of your bankroll. Have you considered invoking a more civilized tone instead of behaving like a toddler tossing about in a manic episode because his mother didn't buy him a chocolate bar?

Degenerate gambling really fucks with your emotions, as it turns out.

Eh. The word "God" can be looked at as an abstraction and the concept or the term is limited by the very narrow perceptions and systems associated with the languages we use to describe the entity. How vague and incomplete, our definition.

It used to be much more convenient back when we had mBTC:USD parity since we had an easy way of basing transactions in a more fiat-focused way. This, at least, helped with accessibility and a better comprehension of the actual valuation of what you were saying. Too bad we can't get it as cheap as US$1000/BTC anymore

---

It's all about how you handle the system. We have no problem converting between dollars and cents (2 orders of magnitude) even though technically, they are different denominations/units. Eventually, it comes as naturally as the conversion between the two, or as naturally as conversion between metric prefixes.