Bitcointalk username: m2017
BTC Address (SegWit): bc1qcaut4m2rdpp6ldluelferejygmfdg7wmeeerpt

JacksClub Username: mm2017mm
Rank: Legendary

Not for that reason. But because these gamblers know how to keep silent and not brag about their pernicious addictions.

Well, yes. If in an offline casino all gamblers are in plain sight, then it is unlikely that you will be able to find out who your neighbor is playing in from a smartphone or laptop.

If you want, you can even hide your passion for gambling from your wife. Many couples only find out about their partner's hobbies after some time. Remember that thread where the groom spent his entire wedding budget on gambling?

Any award is subjective, because the decision to award a candidate is made by judges based on their personal subjective opinion. Of course, the opinion of each judge can be influenced by many factors: bias, corruption, and anything else. In recent years, the Golden Ball has become an analogue of the Oscar, when they award not the best, but the most needed, from the point of view of the SJW popularity. Remember when the Golden Balls were received by Ronaldo and Messi - the most media and hyped football players. But since the Golden Ball is awarded for sporting merits, then the most effective (from an individual point of view) athletes should be awarded. This year, many are inclined to believe that this award has returned to its roots and was awarded based on objective assessment. Rodiri's indicators turned out to be better than Vini's, not to mention all sorts of Messi and Ronaldo.

Great match from Liverpool. 1 point is better than 0 points. But here it is more about the psychological component or the fighting spirit of the team. Liverpool continues to hold the second position in the league, having squeezed out Arsenal (5 points difference is impressive), cannot but affect the morale of the Arsenal players. In this match, it was more important for Liverpool not to lose than to win, which was demonstrated. It remains only to applaud this team.

There is a 50/50 chance that this will happen. Either it will happen or it won't.

No, not at all. They realized that they can make money. Or use it as a political tool to influence voters.

I have 2 thoughts:
- Buffett is quite old and therefore conservative and far from the world of technology. These moments may be factors that don't allow Buffett to change his mind about bitcoin (he just may not understand what it is and how it works).
- We didn't look into Buffett's pocket and it may be that he already "quietly" owns BTC.

Of course, his actions will have a positive impact on the cryptomarket (and also on his fund). Many investors (including institutional ones) will follow his example.

I have no idea what other people can do.

Here you are talking about physical coins, metals, which have different values. In the case of bitcoin ("gold") there are no other "metals". If you offer altcoins as alternatives to "silver" (but don't include litecoin here) and "bronze", then this will be an incorrect comparison, because all this doesn't compare to bitcoin. Altcoins can't be "melted" into the original more valuable metal, because it was garbage and remains so.

If some try to save their bitcoin, it doesn't mean that others will lose the desire to possess the same thing. This will lead to the fact that the more some try to save, the less of it will go to those who want to possess it, which in turn will spur the growth of the cost of bitcoin.

The centuries when money had physical value are far behind. Money now is just a piece of paper that does not have any physical or practical value (similar to Gresham's law, the paper from which the money of African countries is made is more profitable to hand over to waste paper? ). And in the future - it will be only 1 and 0 in the system code.

Changing favorite team, in my opinion, is like betrayal. Your favorite team is your favorite team, so that you can remain loyal to it no matter what, any difficulties or failures. I can’t even imagine any reason to turn away from your favorite team. It seems unthinkable to me. Yes, in my heart, I can speak unflatteringly about them (during failures), but this doesn't mean that I no longer believe in them. Deep down, I still continue to root for them.

I am inclined to believe that there is no strategy at all in the casino that allows you to win. All the merits that are attributed to strategy actually belong to chance / luck.

If a strategy leads to losses, then it is a useless strategy. Or there are no strategies at all, as I wrote above.

And did you want the strategy to also entertain you? In gambling you either win or what is called a loss entertainment.

And perhaps you have better luck here?

That's what I'm talking about.

"As luck would have it".

You stopped halfway, but you should have gone further - to organize a challenge with a prize fund (consisting of contributions from participating gamblers).

Many gamblers talk about the importance of skills and abilities in gambling, as if they are able to control the game process (winnings) thanks to their developed abilities, and not luck. Such a challenge could demonstrate how things really are.

Any goal is easier to achieve if the end goal is clearly formulated. I think your small challenge could allow gamblers to prove themselves and earn some money. Also, an important place here is the accounting of monthly results (statistics) and summing up at the end of the year. This could have a beneficial effect on the effectiveness of gambling due to a controlled game process, and not a chaotic one.

P.S. To be honest, in the long run, gamblers are more likely to end up in the red than in the black due to the same low RTP (<95%), but I would still like to see the results for the year.

$63,793

There is no direct evidence of this. From a technical point of view, HW ledger is reliable and hacking from the outside is almost impossible (no one has succeeded so far, of course, with an allowance for Salim Rashid ). Another point is Ledger itself, which is accused (again, without direct evidence) of possibly having access to user's seed phrases.

What we get as a result: there have been no facts about the theft of crypto by Ledger so far, but this doesn't mean that in the future this will not happen (or will happen).

I would say that this is more a question of trust in this company (which in the past had unpleasant incidents and lied to its clients).

But 2024 has not yet come to an end (why is NYDIG in a hurry?), which means that the results of the report will still change.

NYDIG released this report now to account for its investors and show the profitability of bitcoin? Are they afraid that the BTC-rate may fall before the end and the reports will not be so "beautiful"?

I'm not sure we'll see a new ATH by the end of the year, but it will definitely happen one day (2025?).

Not data, but belief in future growth. What motivates new investors (including institutional ones) to buy it.

There is no need to convince anyone, because those who need it will buy it without your advice.

In case of unsuccessful investments (for example, they were subjected to mass panic and sold bitcoin at a loss) on your advice, they will blame you for the failure.

"This reportedly becomes the first time a university admits and reports owning BTC, with crypto enthusists thinking this is “impressive” for a university that is five times smaller than Havard."
_{Source: https://www.cryptopolitan.com/emory-university-owns-15-million-of-grayscale-mini-trust/}

I almost laughed out loud at this phrase (highlighted in the text). I would like to know who these crypto entquiasts were who considered owning a shares in Grayscale Mini "impressive". I am sure that no more or less experienced user on this forum will consider this event "impressive", because this news would have had a positive "response" from the BTC-community only if "The private research university in Atlanta, Georgia" bought bitcoins directly and had it in its own possession, and not in the form of dubious surrogates offered by Grayscale Mini. Or are the professors at this university so uneducated that they don’t know how and where to buy bitcoin, and even more so, how to store it?

And does this topic apply to those who don't bet on sports (now), but have had similar experience in the past?

Although I personally have never bet on a draw (bet on one of the sides to win), if I were sure of a draw, I would be ready to risk even 100% of my balance. But it should also be noted what the odds would be for such a bet: I would hardly risk most of my balance for the sake of insignificant multipliers.

Well, then the management could have simply bought the players tickets for a regular flight (that would have made their fans happy ) instead of a private jet and they wouldn't even have to ask Manchester City to take these footballers on the flight with them.

Overall, this story doesn't paint Manchester United in the best light, revealing the problems of cost optimization. Saving is good, of course, but isn't it humiliating to ask another team to let their players down? Also, the media found out about it and now we are discussing what is happening (without praising MU for such a step) and I am sure that many don't understand this position of one of the richest teams in the EPL.

Regulation is inevitable: governments begin to regulate everything that arises.

Maybe it's not so bad, because then people will stop speculating on the difference in the cost of bitcoin, and will use it for p2p trading between themselves. In this case, you won't have to pay inflated taxes.

This war has been going on for a long time.

They wouldn't be complaining about "unfairness" if they were early investors.

 More talk of "bitcoin has no value".

Early investors contributed to the bitcoin economy by "supporting" it in the early stages. There is no need to belittle their merits. Because without them nothing would exist now.

How is this different from the stock market? Nothing.

Maybe because such people are so stupid and irresponsible that they are not able to take security measures and preserve their crypto assets. Also, we can add the lack of basic technical skills and the desire to learn something new. I am talking about those people who are not even able to "press a couple of extra buttons" on their smartphone in addition to the ones they use. From my observations, there are plenty of such people around and for them the best solution is "putting their crypto with a third party" if they want to dive into the world of cryptocurrencies. Attempts by such people to show independence in this matter leads to the creation of topics on this forum (and not only), like "I was hacked and all my savings in crypto were stolen".

Paraphrasing the title of the topic, I can ask, how can you trust yourself if the user is a complete lamer newbie?

Place an autonomous power supply in the form of a battery or a rechargeable battery in the box structure. This will not take up much space and will not increase the weight of the structure. You will only need to periodically and pre-change the battery (or charge it).

Also, an autonomous power supply eliminates the problem of power outages, which would reveal the location of the box and make it accessible.

Where did this small country get an extra $780 million? Bhutan doesn't want to disclose the origin of these funds?

If I were in other countries, I would immediately ask myself: it seems that Bhutan knows something that we don’t.

And having learned about the news with Bhutan, Germany probably already regrets the sale.

Perhaps, in the long run, this will turn out to be more profitable, because mining is a means of production, and bitcoin is a product or commodity. Instead of speculating on price, can create (mining).

Maybe you meant to say for Bhutan?

Direct this question to them. No one but them can give a clear answer (if they want to share info).

I can assume that the need for money and lack of faith in the future value of this asset. And also, Germany may know something that we don't know: the future of bitcoin is predetermined and it will be banned (but I think it's just a horror story ).

P.S. Do newbies have the privilege of not using punctuation?