|
Rank Legendary
BTC Segwit addy bc1qdhhxpndl6c420lu8vddtw0c8qg535khk9v9r93
|
|
|
|
Interesting data. Especially since Stake occupies more than half of the market. The difference between the first and second positions is even striking - fivefold. To be honest, I would never have thought that such a monopolization would have taken place in the gambling industry.
I wouldn't say that there is a clear manipulation, we don't know if the data is that accurate in the first place. Assuming it is, gamblers though from time to time shift casinos too so maybe in the next released of the data it could be very different result. As for Stake, they are one of the first, the prime mover in the crypto base gambling platform. So there will be no surprise that they occupy the top spot. Similar to Bitcoin or Ethereum as prime movers in crypto as well. Well, I don't doubt the reliability of the data. Perhaps this is data for some region, and not on a global scale. But even if that's the case, it's still an amazing result. I knew about this casino, of course, but I never thought it was such a big casino. Just think about it - occupying half of the market in such a highly competitive industry is a serious indicator. |
|
|
|
|
Interesting data. Especially since Stake occupies more than half of the market. The difference between the first and second positions is even striking - fivefold. To be honest, I would never have thought that such a monopolization would have taken place in the gambling industry.
|
|
|
|
The sports industry does not only consist of athletes and managers. There are also the reporters or journalists. They are the ones who go to watch live sports and report trackside or from the studio. They follow the season and the athletes. They are the ones who build a narrative and share it to the public. It got me thinking whether they do sports betting or not and uses whatever inside information they have. Or do they spread something just to bet something different? If you were a sports journalist, would you enjoy betting on the sports you report on?
I probably would have liked it. Why not, if it really didn't interfere with work and wouldn't cause any conflict of interest. After all, if the judges or the athletes themselves place bets, there will be a scandal, but journalists are just outsiders who do not influence the outcome of sporting events. |
|
|
|
"Путь Чамби" https://x.com/Chamby_Chuck/status/1965052138540958042В твите выше и в этом https://x.com/Chamby_Chuck/status/1964916392010059845Желающие могут поприветствовать в твиттере человека, заинтересовавшегося присоединением к сообществу. Либо откройте закладку Replies чтобы сразу присоединиться к веткам ответов на твиты. ____________ Уважаемая публика спешу вам доложить что пользователь VILJY - женщина.
Ну да, настолько же, как сообщество Чамби - мультиаккаунты. Не знаю смогу ли это пережить. Меня как будто изнасиловали как того Чанби.
Ну бог даст, когда это случится, полагаю переживешь.
|
|
|
|
I am writing here because it is pointless to write in a self-moderated topic. I used this Twitter account many years ago. I don't own this Twitter account. Because my Twitter account was blocked at that time. In any case, what is your accusation? So far, all I see is that you are disclosing confidential information, that is, personal data. And so that you don't stare at this Twitter, it's already been deleted.
If he dug up your information on the forum, I don't see any privacy violation. Didn't you register with this Twitter account in the bounty? Although I doubt there are people on the forum so naive that they registered with their real accounts or posted their photos. I knew a few, but now people have long deleted their information. Why did you wait for someone to post it here if it really bothers you? Yeah, I realized that I shouldn't have written in this section at all. In the end, you'll be the one to blame... So let the schizophrenic continue his "investigation." |
|
|
|
|
I am writing here because it is pointless to write in a self-moderated topic. I used this Twitter account many years ago. I don't own this Twitter account. Because my Twitter account was blocked at that time. In any case, what is your accusation? So far, all I see is that you are disclosing confidential information, that is, personal data. And so that you don't stare at this Twitter, it's already been deleted.
P.S. I strongly doubt that you would behave in reality the same way as here.
|
|
|
|
|
But this will definitely be interesting to watch. However, just like any (albeit exhibition) Tyson fights. It is clear that this is done solely for the sake of money and the fight is not real. Well, it doesn't matter. But for Tyson's fans, of whom there are still many left in this world, such an event is like a journey into the past. By the way, there's a good TV series about Tyson, "Mike," released by hulu in 2022.
|
|
|
|
I also believe that once Bitcoin becomes really a candidate to be used as an unit of account, its deflation will have already reduced greatly. It will probably not rise at 15-20% yearly like now (taking the SMA-1000 or so), but at less than 10% yearly. This means people would ask themselves the following question all the time: if you want to buy a certain good, would you really wait a year to get it 8% cheaper? In most cases, time preference would make people buy the goods anyway. Perhaps consumerism would take a little dip (and that perhaps isn't that bad) but not by much.
This made me think about the form in which lending can be carried out in such a system. And is this even possible in a system where a bank cannot have only partial collateral in bitcoin? That is, the bank cannot simply write any amount in bitcoin to the credit card account in order to issue loans (it's just that other counterparties will not accept these "virtual BTC" as payment, since everyone knows that supply is limited). But let's say this issue is solved in some way (by requiring the loan to be fully secured with bitcoin, or in some other way), then an interesting feature arises with the interest rate. I completely agree with your assumption that deflation will eventually stabilize. Let's say, for example, deflation will be about 10%. Should the loan rates then be 0% or even negative? After all, deflation now works to some extent as an interest rate on a loan. A situation with a negative interest rate would be particularly interesting. Perhaps this would solve the problem with the bank's capital. That is, it would allow loans to be issued without creating virtual bitcoins, which cannot exist by definition. The bank would have remained within the framework of the requirement for full capital provision. However, such a scheme requires a constant increase in the purchasing power of bitcoin. In such a situation, would it be beneficial for the bank to issue loans at all? But without loans, the real sector of the economy simply cannot exist... |
|
|
|
Я вот не совсем понял. Это касается раздачи конкретно Chamby? Жульена забанили из-за нашего токена? Ведь другие аирдропы как были так и остались и адреса в них указаны, все вроде выглядит как и было. Тема с айрдропом исчезла. Значит была удалена. Соответственно OP забанили на какой-то срок. Формально такие темы запрещены. Фактически триггером для применения этого правила модератором послужила деструктивная "античамбовая" деятельность общеизвестного персонажа, которого похоже также забанили на какой-то срок. |
|
|
|
|
Forum Username; viljy
Merit in 120 days; 140
Bitcoin Segwit Address: bc1qdhhxpndl6c420lu8vddtw0c8qg535khk9v9r93
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is not a unit of account because it cannot perform this function due to its volatility.
You’re mistaken. Bitcoin is absolutely stable in its base unit 1 satoshi is always 1 satoshi, and 1 BTC is always 1 BTC.The dollar and stablecoins are actually unstable, because they do not have a fixed supply. Constant printing and adding new dollars into the economy causes inflation, which reduces their purchasing power.You’ve probably noticed how prices rise year after year each year, with the same amount of money, you can buy less and less goods and services. This is inflation and the instability of the dollar.If you have 1,000 dollars, over time you can buy less and less. For example, if inflation is 7% per year, in 5 years your purchasing power will decrease to about 700 dollars in today’s value. Even though you still have the 1,000 dollars, I hope you understand how unstable the dollar really is. Unlike the dollar, Bitcoin is completely stable, because it has a fixed supply and a clearly predictable monetary policy. If we think from this point of view, then one dollar is also always equal to $1. You are pointing to inflation from unlimited issuance (monetary inflation) as a reason for the decline in the purchasing power of the dollar. But bitcoin is just as unstable, as its purchasing power is growing on the contrary. However, this is also volatility. Further, the most important thing is that the limited issue of a unit of account is completely incompatible with the existing model of financial capitalism. In order for bitcoin to become a unit of account (in reality, not nominally), a new socio-economic model of society is a prerequisite. Let's assume hypothetically that instead of the dollar, bitcoin is now used as a unit of account. Here is a simple example of bitcoin inflation in such a financial system. As you know, inflation can have other causes besides monetary nature. These include cost inflation. As you know, cost inflation cannot be overcome by monetary methods (i.e. neither by raising the refinancing rate, nor by reducing emissions, etc.). Let's introduce Trump's tariffs into this hypothetical economic model. As a result of Trump's tariffs, the manufacturer now includes the tariff rate in the price of an iPhone made in China (let's say the impact of tariffs has already reached the consumer). Then the price of an iPhone for the end user increased due to cost inflation. Moreover, this price is in bitcoin (according to the condition, bitcoin is now a unit of account). How did it happen that a deflationary asset is subject to inflation? Now consider another danger of a deflationary financial system. This is a danger - deflation in itself, when no one wants to spend bitcoins because their purchasing power is growing. What will happen then? Since society needs to live, work, and trade somehow, bitcoin derivatives (for example, wrapped bitcoins) will be issued. Soon, even this will not be enough for the needs of the economy, so then "derivatives of derivatives" will be issued, etc. Bitcoin holders themselves will issue their derivatives as debentures. We get a lot of currencies by their nature that are no different from the dollar, only much worse because they are private currencies. Well, such hypothetical constructions can be continued. However, it is already clear that bitcoin as a unit of account will cause more problems than advantages. Therefore, bitcoin is a commodity, which does not exclude the possibility of using it as a means of payment, but taking into account its equivalent in dollars. In fact, it can be called digital gold if you like. By the way, strictly speaking, gold coins themselves were not a unit of account either. The unit of account is not the coin, but the weight of the coin in ounces or fractions of an ounce. Gold can be used to settle accounts, while gold is a commodity and gold is at the same time a means of accumulation (preservation of value). Bitcoin actually has the same functions. |
|
|
|
~
I understand that lots of folks are still very ignorant concerning using Telegram, some don't even know that likewise the sections for chat, media, channels etc there's also a section for mini-apps and they can easily locate them by using the search icon just like it is on the image above, all they just have to do is search on the name of any project or game like I searched TonStation on the search icon in that image and found the TonStation games mini-app, this was same way I used in locating several projects during the airdrops period on Telegram, the app is becoming very Interesting cause of this new features.
You know that you need to be careful with the search, because scammers fake bots of popular applications. Therefore, always check the bot's address with the official website of the project, or X, or the Telegram channel. Even if there is a blue verification checkmark, it is better to check the bot's address. |
|
|
|
|
Well, it turns out that all the participants of the beach party receive some part of the prize pool. And not just the first 100 positions of the leaderboard, as I mistakenly assumed. So we are looking forward to the distribution of prizes, and of course new contests and events from TonStation.
|
|
|
|
Week 04 payments has been processed Bonus winner: Alex077
Thank you guys for an awesome 1 month campaign. Look forward to working with some of you on my other campaigns. Don't forget to visit the project's ANN thread and show some love. Thank you @CryptopreneurBrainboss for the excellent campaign management. I hope TonStation will continue to work here in the future. |
|
|
|
|
Forum Username; viljy
Merit in 120 days; 140
Bitcoin Segwit Address: bc1qdhhxpndl6c420lu8vddtw0c8qg535khk9v9r93
|
|
|
|
|
Slot #: 21
BTC Address: bc1qdhhxpndl6c420lu8vddtw0c8qg535khk9v9r93
|
|
|
|
Willy woo says here that stablecoins are the key to making bitcoin a unit of account. My initial questions are: (1) Isn’t bitcoin already a unit of account? (2) If not, then what will it need to be one? (3) Why are stablecoins the key to making bitcoin a unit of account?
Bitcoin is not a unit of account because it cannot perform this function due to its volatility. Bitcoin is currently a commodity. Actually, this influencer considers stablecoins to be the key to overcoming bitcoin's volatility. Another question is that the direct mechanism of this is completely incomprehensible (as I understand it, neither does the influencer himself, otherwise he would have written about it). An indirect economic mechanism for overcoming volatility already exists, and this is the usual conversion of a volatile asset into stablecoins (maintaining purchasing power at a certain level). But this indirect mechanism has both advantages and disadvantages. As for the second question, it's about the mysterious mechanism of direct conversion of bitcoin into a unit of account through stablecoins. No one, including the influencer himself, knows exactly how to do this, but let's say it happened. What would that mean for the world? Bitcoin as a unit of account means the return of the financial system to the pre-emission era of the gold standard, which in turn means the impossibility of lending (the inability of the bank to issue debt), which supports the distribution of risks of real production. This is essentially the destruction of the economic system that currently exists in the world. |
|
|
|
|
Such an impact is possible, but it seems to me that it is not so strong that miners, due to the decrease in profits from fees, start turning off unprofitable capacities and the network hashrate would drop significantly, and then the difficulty of mining. Even so, the system is self-balancing, and the hashrate will stabilize at some level of mining profitability.
So I don't think there are any reasons for concern or gloomy forecasts for bitcoin from the activities of financial organizations operating bitcoin in various derivative forms. The real problem for the bitcoin network may be prolonged Internet outages on a global scale caused by some political events.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
