|
Gambling has always been both. It is of course a source of entertainment and fanfare. Gambling is fun. It is a great leisure or relaxing activity. But it also has a bad side. It can't be done beyond moderation. Other than losing more money than intended, it can also eat your entire time up. It can even destroy you and your family. So gambling can be good but it is also a worse kind of evil if done in addiction.
I think it helps if we gamble with a fixed amount of money and time. That would help us draw the line between fanfare and financial havoc.
|
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is honest money. And that's whether governments allow it or not. Bitcoin is ruled by codes. It isn't ruled by people, by governments. The honesty of Bitcoin comes from this. Bitcoin does not have ulterior motives, selfish interests, etc. It can't hide anything like that in its code because it is open source. It's transparent. Unlike Bitcoin, governments are always run by motives which are beyond the knowledge of the public.
I think it is a hedge against hyperinflation mainly because it doesn't have an infinite supply. Unlike fiat that is unlimited, Bitcoin cannot go beyond the maximum supply allowed by the codes.
I hope world war 3 isn't coming. But if it comes, fiat will weaken. So I expect Bitcoin to soar.
|
|
|
|
I think Satoshi didn't include halving in the design of Bitcoin for its price to rise. I guess the design was simply imitating the way gold mining works. As mining goes on, the gold deposits on the earth dwindle, and so the new additional supply also decreases. This is how Bitcoin mining works as well. As mining goes on, the reward decreases over time.
I don't see this as a weakness though. And I also don't agree that public trust on Bitcoin is based on high price. Although there is that portion in the community, they don't represent the public. Bitcoin has features. These features are the main reasons why people are behind Bitcoin.
But if he relies on the principle of gold to create a halving event for bitcoin, then he clearly wants bitcoin to increase in value over time because the scarcity factor also helps gold increase in price over time. Although in the bitcoin whitepaper , he only mentioned it as a peer-to-peer currency, other than that , we cannot be sure that he does not want bitcoin to become an asset like gold. We cannot know what his thoughts were, but given what was going on, I cannot rule out the possibility that Satoshi also intended to turn bitcoin into an asset and not really a currency. Probably because Satoshi knew very well how the fiat system would kill the value of money. Scarcity or finitude was there to address this. A fix supply in Bitcoin's design is probably grounded on the fact that money shouldn't be as easy to inflate as fiat. Otherwise he's not really addressing the never-ending rising of prices of goods and services and the devaluation of money. Satoshi designed Bitcoin to be a currency and a currency is also an asset at the same time. So I guess this isn't something that we should be confused about. Satoshi definitely wanted Bitcoin to be an asset. |
|
|
|
|
I think Satoshi didn't include halving in the design of Bitcoin for its price to rise. I guess the design was simply imitating the way gold mining works. As mining goes on, the gold deposits on the earth dwindle, and so the new additional supply also decreases. This is how Bitcoin mining works as well. As mining goes on, the reward decreases over time.
I don't see this as a weakness though. And I also don't agree that public trust on Bitcoin is based on high price. Although there is that portion in the community, they don't represent the public. Bitcoin has features. These features are the main reasons why people are behind Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
On the press conference, Tyson Fury has certainly made a very good argument on size and why being bigger is certainly always better in boxing if the fight is between fighters of similar measure of capabilities.
But similar measures of capabilities is hardly found in boxing. Boxers mostly have individual characteristics. But despite this, despite the difference, size really matters. Size is a big factor. I agree with Fury that size really matters. It can't be brushed off as a negligible advantage. After all size isn't just size. It could mean strength, power, reach advantage, height advantage, etc. All these matters so much in boxing. In this particular bout, although I'm also a fan of Usyk, I don't think it's hard to predict that Tyson is probably winning. |
|
|
|
|
It's just the same. It may be that betting is more associated with sports betting, but betting is a general term that refers to making a bet. And that's what you do in all of gambling, whether it's sports betting or dice, crash, poker, slots, etc. They're all gambling and for you to be able to join or play and get a chance to win, the main thing that you need to do is to bet. In the context of gambling, to bet is the same as to gamble. Betting and gambling mean the same thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, we should already learn our lessons this time. Bitcoin remains unpredictable. It rises when we least expect it. It could also fall when we're expecting it otherwise. But there's also the lesson that if only we stick to hodling, we will reap benefits in the end.
The bullishness that the Bitcoin spot ETF and the upcoming halving bring make us confident that there will be further upward movements soon but it might also not be the case. So while we should be bullish with all the development, if the price falls instead, we can rest assured that hodling would still make everything worth it.
|
|
|
|
|
Reliable in the sense that it probably took into consideration their comprehensive past performances as far as numbers are concerned. But not reliable in the sense that plays, games, performances of players are not the same all the time. Errors can't be predicted. Great timings can't be predicted.
There are so many factors that computers cannot take into consideration. They can only analyze based on what's fed to them. In this sense, their predictions are not very different from the odds released by bookmakers. And I don't really make bets depending on others' predictions.
|
|
|
|
I have it drawn in my scorecard, but it can either way, but both fighters deserve a rematch Fundora proves he is ready to become a champion.
Checking the poll I created no one among us voted for Fundora, so we can call this an upset?
Tim Tszyu by KO - 8 (100%)
Tim Tszyu By Decision - 0 (0%)
Fundora By KO - 0 (0%)
Fundora By Decision - 0 (0%)
The poll you made here only got 8 votes but all voted for Tszyu which was clearly the favorite. But more than your poll, this is an upset win for Fundora because Tszyu was a 1.17-favorite. He was expected to win this fight. His victory was predicted to be more than 85%. Fundora on the other hand got 5.00 odds. But as we all know, the fight didn't really go smoothly. It's unfortunate that Tszyu had to suffer a cut early in the fight that wasn't caused by a legitimate punch from Fundora's. Although Fundora performed well with his jabs, the fact that Tszyu had to continue with the fight partially blind because of the cut from Fundora's elbow made a big difference. It's good though that both fighters agreed for a rematch. |
|
|
|
|
I haven't tried gambling through Telegram. Although I have Telegram, I seldom use it even for communication, so how much more for gambling. But with the sound of it I think I don't find it really interesting. If I want to gamble and play, why would I use a communication channel instead of gambling sites themselves? Online casinos for example can definitely offer what gamblers prefer because it's their business. They've mastered it already. I probably just prefer playing in my favorite online casino.
|
|
|
|
My guess is also within the $80,000 range. It might be around $85,000. By the end of the year, it's already around 8 months after the halving. So I believe that's already a point when the effect of the reduced block reward is felt. The effect of the halving is gradual. That's why the ATH that usually follows after the halving will take at least a year. Since it is already 8 months after, the price must have already absorbed the halving. This will probably approach $100,000 in the first quarter of 2025, although it could also happen early, meaning within 2024 itself.
With such speculated price, people should think on how to invest in this market or how to accumulate more as the price is going to 65k level. That's a very good profit if in case, it will go up to 85k range. However, do make sure that you know your financial limits when it comes to holding as you'll never know what's gonna happen next on this very volatile market. that 65k is still the price of bitcoin up to now and still no plans of growing more ATM . by chance that in 15 days we will be having that halving here? if the price do not spike at 80k after halving then I believe that we will not see that in the whole year. Although it is possible, I am not expecting a spike towards $80,000. I am not expecting that it would be sudden and quick. I am expecting that it is gradual. And since the halving is happening within this month, there would still be 8 months left within the year. I don't believe that the price won't be able to reach $80,000 within those months however gradual the rise would be. Don't mind too much the price right now. I think this is just a rest, a calm before the storm if you want. This is just a pause between growths. As we speak, the price has already climbed back to above $68,000. |
|
|
|
|
I've already read issues regarding the Lightning network months ago. Some are too pessimistic about it that they're outright dismissing it already as a solution to scaling. But some others are saying they're simply exaggerating or setting an ideal standard.
For somebody who's just on the sidelines, I don't feel like this is a big deal. This is merely part of the bigger process of development and innovation. The Lightning network is under development. While at it, there must also be other alternatives that are being developed. This is all part of a never ending progress.
|
|
|
|
My guess is also within the $80,000 range. It might be around $85,000. By the end of the year, it's already around 8 months after the halving. So I believe that's already a point when the effect of the reduced block reward is felt. The effect of the halving is gradual. That's why the ATH that usually follows after the halving will take at least a year. Since it is already 8 months after, the price must have already absorbed the halving. This will probably approach $100,000 in the first quarter of 2025, although it could also happen early, meaning within 2024 itself.
With such speculated price, people should think on how to invest in this market or how to accumulate more as the price is going to 65k level. That's a very good profit if in case, it will go up to 85k range. However, do make sure that you know your financial limits when it comes to holding as you'll never know what's gonna happen next on this very volatile market. The Bitcoin market remains highly unpredictable but we can still make general predictions. Although we don't have any assurance that the price would reach $85,000 for example, we can be confident that it will come. And if that comes, Bitcoin's $65,000 right now is indeed a low price to enter. Especially now that is a halving year, we have reason to believe that the price would rise months following the halving. I'm confident that the pre-halving ATH at $73,000 which was reached just weeks ago isn't the ATH all throughout the year. There will be another one this year. |
|
|
|
I read the rules or supposedly rules and the only way to end this fight is through knockout, so that will be vicious and we will see if Tyson still has the power, (I believed so as this is natural to him).
I can't remember since when I've seen this kind of rules but I doubt it that this is going to be a natural one but I'd like to see how powerful still Tyson is. He might be that old but his experience and his body is still being trained continuously but with his speed, that's what Jake can see where he's got the advantage. But we still have the discussions about Mike being on his prime and he'd surely be easily knocking out Jake if they both live on the same era. Let's stop with that argument because it's not the kind of thing that we'd see in our lifetime. I have not read the rules but I don't believe such a rule exists. Although this is an unfair match, this is still under the regulations of concerned agencies. And I don't think an agreement that says the only way for this match to end is through a knockout would be approved. In the end this is more of an exhibition match than a real fight. Of course this is Jake Paul, he doesn't really fight. He just boxes against anybody he thinks he has an advantage. If possible, he wants the opponent to be interesting enough to make money. Tyson will probably just play along and earn. I'm not sure if you have read @hilariousetc posted regarding the rules. But as stated, it could be a hybrid between pro rule and exhibitions matches that's why you will not find it any any boxing rules as it is not exist and maybe they just made it up for this fight because they also take into consideration Tyson age that's why they said it's 2 minutes. Not final yet and not official, so we will have to see what will be the rules. Perhaps if there is such a leak they maybe it might be as close as what the rules might be in this fight. And it makes the fight very interesting as we have said. The fight is a joke in the beginning so it's not surprising anymore when it comes to how funny the rules are. It's just like Royce vs Mike which means this is exactly an exhibition fight. 2 minute round will only result in a decision which is absurd because it also says the only way to win the fight is by way of KO. But good luck with that because they are wearing sparring gloves. But this is on Netflix, nothing is lost when you already have an account. This is indeed a funny match so we shouldn't be surprised if the terms and conditions are also as funny. You mean Roy right? I mean Roy Jones and Mike Tyson had their exhibition match as well. But there was also a match that almost happened between Royce Gracie and Mike Tyson. There's no way this is going to be a pro fight. This would only be an exhibition match. This match is a testimony that Jake Paul is not serious in turning pro. He's actually jumping from exhibition to pro to exhibition matches depending on which gives him more popularity and more money. He's never been a serious boxer. |
|
|
|
|
My guess is also within the $80,000 range. It might be around $85,000. By the end of the year, it's already around 8 months after the halving. So I believe that's already a point when the effect of the reduced block reward is felt. The effect of the halving is gradual. That's why the ATH that usually follows after the halving will take at least a year. Since it is already 8 months after, the price must have already absorbed the halving. This will probably approach $100,000 in the first quarter of 2025, although it could also happen early, meaning within 2024 itself.
|
|
|
|
I read the rules or supposedly rules and the only way to end this fight is through knockout, so that will be vicious and we will see if Tyson still has the power, (I believed so as this is natural to him).
I can't remember since when I've seen this kind of rules but I doubt it that this is going to be a natural one but I'd like to see how powerful still Tyson is. He might be that old but his experience and his body is still being trained continuously but with his speed, that's what Jake can see where he's got the advantage. But we still have the discussions about Mike being on his prime and he'd surely be easily knocking out Jake if they both live on the same era. Let's stop with that argument because it's not the kind of thing that we'd see in our lifetime. I have not read the rules but I don't believe such a rule exists. Although this is an unfair match, this is still under the regulations of concerned agencies. And I don't think an agreement that says the only way for this match to end is through a knockout would be approved. In the end this is more of an exhibition match than a real fight. Of course this is Jake Paul, he doesn't really fight. He just boxes against anybody he thinks he has an advantage. If possible, he wants the opponent to be interesting enough to make money. Tyson will probably just play along and earn. |
|
|
|
|
Gambling is mainly for fun. The most important aspect in gambling is that you enjoy it, you get entertained by it. That's why one spends on gambling because he finds it relaxing or enjoyable. Of course there could be losses in the end, but one doesn't mind because one pays for an entertainment anyway.
If fun is not there, if one is not in any way entertained while gambling, I don't see the point of doing gambling. Would you survive doing something that you find not interesting at all?
|
|
|
|
|
There's no harm to be exposed on both. Gold and Bitcoin have their own respective strengths and weaknesses as investment assets. You may prefer Bitcoin over gold for now because of how fast its value appreciates compared to gold, but when it comes to longevity, I think gold doesn't need to prove anything. Although we hope, it is not a guarantee that Bitcoin would remain relevant a century from now. As to gold, it might even be a certainty.
|
|
|
|
|
There are no bookmakers in crash games. These are random games which are completely based on luck. There are no odds to be given whatsoever. What remains though is the house edge.
So it is absurd to try to make regular money out of it. If you are lucky and you stay with the game, sooner or later you will suffer a loss and the house edge will prevail over your luck. Your luck isn't permanent but the house edge will always be there in every game.
It seems they have a poor choice of hobby.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
