~snip~ Different opinion? I bet no reasonable opinion can be contrary to the DCA investment approach, the only suggestion here will be another investment approach and not the condemnation of the DCA approach as the approach is not the only way out in investment. Aside from this, DCA is a very good investment approach that fits in for the poor, average and the rich, it helps you average both your risk and earning possibilities. Mind you, with this approach, you should know that you would rather be conservative, so the aggressive investors or the most lucky ones might gain more than you, but still, you will average the pains of the bad market behaviours and also average the benefits of the good market behaviours which make the DCA approach unique because either way, you will never miss out.
I think another one of the advantages of DCA is that you can simply automate and forget about it. That way you will simply invest more and more over time without thinking about it. That's usually the best strategy when investing. Simply putting more and more money in it over time and never touching it.
|
|
|
I only judge gamblers who try to do it as a job. I think these people are a little crazy to choose something for a means to get income where the statistics show that they are likely to lose money. I don’t have any issues with people who gamble with the intent of having a good time. That is what entertainment is all about.
I think some of those people that show it as a job might end up doing something else, say for example they say on a YouTube channel that they do it as a job, but in reality they are just doing advertisement for the casinos. I think in a way that is a job in gambling, just in advertisement, not actual gambling. That way they can actually get a pay check from Google for their advertisements, or maybe even directly from the casinos. But yeah, anyone that gambles frequently will most probably end up with less money that what they started with.
|
|
|
The most unpleasant and dangerous thing for a player is the desire to win back. In my opinion, it is this desire that has ruined most bankrolls. However, there is something similar to winning back - the desire for beautiful profit figures. I recently watched an interview with a bookmaker, where he told an interesting story. There was a certain rich player who won 900 thousand dollars in a series of several bets. It was a great success. It would seem that after such a win, you should definitely fix the profit? But no, this person was overcome by a thirst for profit and for some reason he wanted to bring his winnings to a "round figure" of 1 million dollars. And he bet on all his capital. As a result, he lost all his funds. What does this mean? That you should not strive for beautiful figures.
Absolutely. That's the thing, if someone was extremely lucky and end up winning a big lotto prize, they will most probably just continue gambling it all away. That's partly why we don't get to see so many rich people from gambling. It's so rare to win big and even rarer to keep it. But the thing is that most people just continue gambling because they are addicted at that point. And the casinos will try to keep them playing as well, so you need to have a lot of determination to actually stop after winning.
|
|
|
~snip~ In many lotteries, especially National ones, there is a condition that the winner must show his face and wave to the camera, holding a check with a huge amount of money won. And it is clear that no one wants such fame throughout the country, because all the poor friends and relatives will hate him, but such conditions are mandatory. After all, the sponsor of the lottery sees this as a huge promotion: all people will imagine themselves in the place of this lucky person and will also go and buy tickets for this lottery. And the sponsors do not care that they are making life difficult for the winners of this lottery with such an interview.
As far as I can remember, I think you usually can have a legal representative to go fetch the prize for you. They will have the ticket on their hands, but they are representing you legally. So in that way you get the ticket but they don't get to see you. It protects the privacy of the people that will end up winning a lot of money. Rich people do these kinds of things all the time. They value their privacy.
|
|
|
~snip~ The latest polls say it's 50.8 vs 49.2 for Harris. Also, the same poll says expected error is 3%, so this could as well be 49 vs 51 for Trump. https://www.activote.net/harris-lead-significantly-reduced/The voters are so biased towards one or the other candidate it gets ridiculous. For instance the majority of Black people vote for Harris, even though she's not black, but tells them that she is. Tell me that isn't stupid. Also, most high income people want Harris, even though she wants to raise taxes. Also. There seems to be whole 4% of people who claim they're right in the political spectrum but will vote for Harris, who is totally on the left. Like why would anybody vote for someone who has completely opposite opinions on everything? Anyway, the way I see it Trump will eventually win unless they kill him or arrest him for something. Yeah, I'm not sure about what is going to happen in the US in this upcoming election, because frankly speaking, it seems to be quite random. It seems that a lot of people in the US simply vote for whatever ideals they have in their minds instead of actual plans. I think it's becoming more and more of a TV show kind of thing were it's all just a game kind of thing. Even only about a decade ago it was actually quite different. Now it's all just insults and trash talking the other party. No one really talks about the way forward.
|
|
|
~snip~ Nobody "invented" gambling! Gambling took many forms in different parts of the world and appeared in regions unrelated, it spawned from games in some instances and from magical ritual occult stuff in others, making decisions based on luck was a form of gambling and the first traces of it are in the stone age, more than 10k years ago.
True, and in a way, "gambling" is a type of "hope" or "faith". In religion, you don't know if your sacrifices are going to give you the fruits you are hoping. It's a gamble. Sometimes it works, but you're not sure. The thing is that the odds are different. If you put the effort and work hard, it is very probable that you are going to see the rewards. But if you gamble, the odds are actually against you, so you will most probably lose the money. Similar machinery, but different parameters.
|
|
|
The gambler may win some big money in the gambling after some game in the gambling site with some experience.Some claim the winning happened in the slot and blackjack games due to the luck.Day before yesterday,I met my gambling friend who was in gambling over 7 years of time,he said me the game after the experience was based on the tactics and strategy based on the experience.
But my question is many new gamblers also make the huge money after few games.So the new gamblers made the money by luck or experience.My view on the new people is purely based on the luck,because not have huge experience at the initial stage of game.In this we need to consider some experienced gamblers making huge loss again and again after the huge experience because of greedy.Greedy should be avoided to loss the entire capital loss.Share your opinion based on your experience in gambling games.
At the end of the day it is all just luck. It doesn't matter if you know that a dice has 1/6 chances of giving you a three, you still have to roll it and see what happens. Someone might have no idea about it and bet on a three and get it while you might get the odds and know everything in detail and roll a 2.
|
|
|
At first some judge gamblers often and later they become gambling addicts. I found it very serious to be curious and know what may have been their reason for the sudden change of mind. I know that there are difficult times to make money and maintain money, which is a world problem. I have had some thoughts on it and this is what I think may have been the reason.
1. In the beginning they may have been doing well financially and see no reason to gamble, maybe life later on throws them a financial curveball, or perhaps responsibility compels them to look for quick money through gambling. If not attempting gambling was an ethic for them they should have stuck to another alternative why did they choose this one?
2. On second thought. I feel it is the influence and conviction of people around them who are into gambling that made them go into gambling at the end of the day.
However, it is a sad story to see people who cast away gamblers thinking they are irresponsible, and then fund themselves on this same web doing the same thing. It reminds me of how vulnerable humans can be, and that anyone can change habits when a condition falls on them.
The reality is that many people like to see the problems in other people but usually are hard to find the same problems in themselves. It's just a common thing. Similar to how it is easier to simply blame someone else for your problems. Actually owning your life and accepting its challenges is not easy but it is definitely something to be proud of. It is what forges your life.
|
|
|
~snip~ Kamala is not that good in debates, unlike some of the other Democrat politicians. And she has already refused to debate Trump once. A debate was set for 4th September, with Fox News being the hosts. Kamala pulled out of it, since she was afraid of facing Trump. But at some point she need to take him heads on. Recent national polls have put Kamala ahead by a whisker (latest one is from ABC News/Ipsos). But that advantage can be lost in a moment, if she refuses to participate in the debates.
I just searched for the current polls summary from Wikipedia and it looks like this: ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.talkimg.com%2Fimages%2F2024%2F09%2F03%2F99LH5.png&t=665&c=gQLp7Df7FKle4w) It seems to have a massive advantage to Harris. But the thing with polls is that they can change at any time, as you can also see in the same graph.
|
|
|
~snip~ Actually in this case there is nothing easy in my opinion because after all even though in simple terms DCA is buying bitcoin consistently in a certain amount but in the end this is also not easy because after all when we do DCA in fact it is not that easy because there must be some considerations and planning that is really mature from the start so that DCA itself is not an easy thing to do and not everyone can do it.
I personally don't really like to think it's easy because in the end, applying the theory of DCA will actually be much more difficult than imagined, especially in maintaining the consistency that we have to do so there is nothing easy in this even though the collection is through DCA.
DCA is simply increasing the sampling frequency of a function that you don't know because the future price of Bitcoin is unknown. So, if you lump sum you basically take a single point snapshot of the function. As you can see, it all depends on the future price to see which strategy was best. If the price goes down in the relevant period of time, DCA was better. If the price goes up, lump sum was better. That's pretty much it.
|
|
|
Whether it is good or bad for society depends on the gambler himself. If they gamble because they feel the need, or because they expect a big win, or to get extra income and use the money for important needs, then don't gamble. But if you gamble to relax, have fun, and enjoy the atmosphere just for fun without using important money, I think it's okay and go ahead if it will make you happy. In addition, there are limits that you must avoid and also know, especially limiting the amount of money you bet when gambling. However, gambling will still be looked down upon by society. Because most people gamble just to make money that makes them lose control when gambling and destroys them, and that makes society judge gambling as a bad thing which is actually the gambler's fault.
Yeah, it depends as you say. So, if the gambler has a big issue with gambling, then yeah, society ends up having some issues as well. But if the gambler uses gambling as a simple entertainment, then there is no notable harm in society at all.
|
|
|
Recently I heard an interesting and relevant expression: "a gambler does not suffer, he enjoys, and his relatives suffer." On the one hand, I agree with these words, because if a gambler continues to play and continue his problematic path of gambling, then he clearly likes it. But on the other hand, we have all heard many times that every gambler says that his personality is split into two - the old personality and the problem player. Therefore, I think that gamblers also suffer.
It is a bit true, but also a bit not true, in the sense that the gambler enjoys it in the moment, but doesn't enjoy it in the long term. The same with their family and friends, they don't get to even enjoy the moment, they only see the negatives of it. So, in a way, it is a very selfish act if you have people depending on you.
|
|
|
Keeping children away from gambling is usually the best way, because if children are involved in gambling while they are learning, the future of that child is bleak. Because generally before 18 years of age every child's education is most important for his knowledge acquisition, and gambling addiction is the person who has seen someone gambling before. Because if there is no gambler in your family then there will never be a gambling addict in that family. Because children usually learn politeness first from their parents, and if instead of politeness they get a sense of gambling then that child will definitely show the will to gamble. So I think it is most important to take care of yourself before taking care of children.
Yeah, the brain of the kids is still being developed, so they need some time. In general it is a good idea to have checks and balances that don't allow kids to be able to be around those things. But at the end of the day, parents should teach the kids to be able to confront those things, because they will have to do that anyway later on.
|
|
|
~snip~ DCA is a suitable strategy for Bitcoin accumulation and for those who want to hold Bitcoin for the long term. DCA is an effective strategy for those who do not have the ability to invest large sums of money at once or those who, despite having the money, are not willing to take the investment risk. As such, it will help an investor to buy bitcoins regularly as well as bring the difference between the buying and selling of bitcoins to a tolerable level. A low income to high income person will have the opportunity to collect bitcoins using this strategy. There is a thread on the forum Buy the DIP, and HODL! for those who want to know about DCA. By reading this thread carefully one can get more knowledge about this method. Yeah, because at the end of the day, DCA simply means someone is going to spend a certain percentage of their income into Bitcoin, every time. Over time, that is the best strategy, because that's the best strategy with any asset that continues to increase in value. Sure, it can be a bumpy road, but on average, it will continue to go up.
|
|
|
~snip~ Congestion only becomes a problem when the underlying blockchain network experiences a surge in popularity. Stablecoins are expensive on the main Ethereum blockchain. But not on L2 networks or highly-scalable L1s like Solana and BSC. The biggest downside of most stablecoins is not network congestion, but rather privacy/freedom. The vast majority of them are highly-centralized. Even Tether and USD Coin have a "blacklist" feature.
Gambling with truly-decentralized stablecoins like DAI and USDD is becoming scarce these days. If you only want convenience, then choose a centralized stablecoin instead. Fiat is even worse, imo. To each, their own currency of preference. At least we know the gambling industry won't be going away soon.
Well, you can always use Lightning with Bitcoin, which is almost free to use and almost instant as well. This is possible because there are funds in Bitcoin that are secured on chain that are transacted in the second layer. Any other coin will have the same scaling issues, Bitcoin is the best coin you can use with widespread usage.
|
|
|
~snip~ It's essential to improve upon the mistakes made and, going into future sessions, take action with responsibility at hand. Adaption is the thing we are known for, after all ![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif) Yeah, the thing is that not everyone will want to take that responsibility. It's easy to not take that responsibility and blame other people about it. That's what most people do anyway, I think it's pretty common.
|
|
|
~snip~ Yes, it is possible. Control and discipline is something that is not easy to have especially in gambling where urges happen all the time. The urge to play more after a win, the urge to deposit more when you lose, and the urge to chase the losses which I think is the worst of all.
Making withdrawals is a good way to tell ourselves that we really won against the house and it gives pleasure to those who want more money in their pockets. So I think we must do it regularly as long as we hit the planned amount or better the minimum withdrawal.
Yes, it is an addiction in the end. It feels good to win when gambling, all the games are designed to make your brain addicted to it. But the good news is that the solution is also right there, in your brain. You can control your brain and not gamble. It will be difficult but it is possible. You can just think about all the millions and millions of people that don't gamble. It's clearly possible, it's all in your brain.
|
|
|
Whilst yes owning residential property is considered an investment, I do think it's important to look at the benefits of owning property (safety, security, stability), as non tangible benefits, that are not directly measured through monetary returns to justify the investment. I think home ownership is important for these reasons.
One point that is usually not mentioned is the amount of debt used to buy your own home. Owning with a massive debt is kinda similar to renting, with the extra risks of ownership. If your debt is so massive that you basically have to continue paying it for the rest of your life, then that's almost the same as renting. But with renting you can get out of there for free if there's a massive problem with the property, whereas the owner gets stuck with all those types of payments. One of the best benefits of buying a house is to end up with a lower cost of living at some point, that is when you don't have to pay interest any more for it. If you never achieve that, then it's not very different to renting. And if you miss the payments you might even lose your home, similar to not paying rent.
|
|
|
~snip~ I can only add that I do not want to say that it is impossible to earn money in gambling. But I think it is possible only in such a section of gambling as poker. And then, only very good mathematicians will be successful in it, which the casino undoubtedly tracks down and tries to prohibit them from playing. Also, a poker player can earn money if he streams his poker games.
As for other types of gambling, attempts to turn them into a permanent source of income are stupid.
Yes, you're right. Some games actually have reasonable odds, still in favor to the casino, but not too crazy, like Poker, Craps, etc. The problem is, that still the odds are against the gambler, so that means that in the long run the gambler will lose. So, the only way that a gambler can actually make money is if there is a one off where they win big and they then stop gambling. If they keep gambling, then everything will tend to behave like the odds predict, which means the casino gets to keep the money.
|
|
|
~snip~ To be honest, I don't even understand how players can bet their bitcoin, because it has deflationary properties as an asset. This means that it will most likely grow over time, roughly speaking, we could bet more stablecoins in a year than today, so why bet today? Of course, many players will object to me that they want to play here and now, but in this case it is better to bet stablecoins, because we will be able to understand our result after several games. With bitcoin, this will be difficult to do, because it is not clear how to calculate its price, by current values or by those that we bet a year ago. In short, if we bet bitcoins, we simply will not be able to adequately analyze our game.
I think it is simply because people expect that they will end up with more Bitcoin in the end... But it is quite clear that the gambling odds are against the gambler, and the casinos are the ones keeping all that Bitcoin. It's a bit similar to when people want to sell Bitcoin at "high" prices and to hope for the price to go to a "low" price and end up with more Bitcoin in the end. That's also a gamble really, with extra fees.
|
|
|
|