I was thinking of introducing a capped pot.

The capped gambling amount (the maximum funds that can be put into a pot -also voted by the community) should be below the "not worth it" factor for developers who are thinking about sabotaging their current project to unfairly win huge riches.

So lets say 50k USD cap was voted by the community because the developers have invested 500k into the project already. They will not sabotage their 500k project to win the 50k pot. It won't be worth it. And instead, it would be worth it to bet on their success because they would win money to further finance their project.

Exactly my sentiment. Gambling, playing video games or watching movies on a tiny screen is so absurdly uncomfortable and inconvenient, it borders on the masochistic. Honestly, I prefer real life gambling over online gambling but sometimes, online gambling can be fun too because it can offer things that real life casinos do not/can not.
but phones are really the wrong medium for it either way.

It does feel more serious when you are viewing a large screen and using many buttons to delegate your actions.

I sometimes wonder why people are starting to shift away from computers/laptops and adapt more to smaller, mobile devices.

That really does make perfect sense though... The mobile phone is currently the easiest and most adopted social technology which can support gambling games. Once something even more widespread and more often used is found, gambling will be all over that new medium.

Personally, I do not mind the extra convenience. The casinos are trying really hard to please us in any way possible just so we will gamble on their site.  Its a good self regulating system.

I do think however, that those newbie gamblers will get bored of mobile gambling once they become veteran gamblers.

Well if you sell them then thats giving up a high potential for big winnings for the price of whatever somebody else is willing to pay for the same privilege. You can think of it as folding when you don't feel like you got the right "cards". Sometimes a gut feeling can save you. But I think that gamblers do not have this kind of mindset. Gamblers almost always will try their luck and hope for the best. That's part of the "rush".

Also, if everyone got them for free, as you say, then would the ticket's worth not drop drastically? And with that, the value of the "big winnings"? Sounds like a double edged sword, if you ask me.

If these mad ramblings is what you consider to be facts, then I can only wonder what you would consider as a conspiracy theory. What makes you think that leaders of countries take orders from some secret individuals? Why not consider the secret individuals also taking orders from even higher ranked secret individuals? At what point does this all become a bunch of unverified bull?

If you have nothing to show us in terms of simple, but hard evidence, then why would anyone take this seriously?

Sournce: https://www.tradingview.com/news/cointelegraph:b30def1fb094b:0/


Binance is choking in last place lol

From my experience, fair rewards are rather likely to be determined by other rival online gambling casinos. If A-Bet casino is offering a bonus and B-Bet casino is offering a much larger bonus, why would anyone play in A-Bet casino? The question of low costs and low expenses is usually of interest not to the casino but rather more to the actual gambler. So casinos need to stay competitive first and foremost if they want people to collect bonuses on their casino website instead of someone else's.

A few months sounds like a more realistic timeline than a few days.

I love this post so much I want to frame it with a nice golden frame and hang it on my wall.

Just when one thinks that Sam-Bankman-Fried is not only a scammer but a incompetent scammer. An incompetent scammer who lost $100 million USD and is now serving "house arrest" at his mommy's house. His bed is probably a racecar. No mentions of his girlfriend, who I heard was the one who ratted him out to the police. Which is why I guess we have not heard about her arrest in the news.  

Congratulations! Luck or no luck it is quite the achievement! Beating the odds like that is always a welcome sight in the gambling community part of Bitcointalk. Even if you do not make any huge, life-changing winnings from that single stroke of luck, feats of such probability defying acts are still admired by us all.

Also congratulations to the other winners! Those were close answers!

Not much I can congratulate you with but have a merit, you lucky guy, you!

I think these scammers do ultimately serve a noble goal.

Even if they do not realize it, they are teaching people the importance of not giving your Bitcoin away to third party holders, especially centralized ones. The lessons learned are quite expensive. They cost you everything. But in the end, you will learn to never let your Bitcoin out of your own wallet and you will learn to not give your wallet access to someone else. Each of these scams has one thing in common: The coins were not in the wallets of the people to whom they belong. They were in the hands of someone else.

But nobody should feel ashamed for having to learn these lessons the hard and expensive way. It is part of the journey to becoming a hodler.

 

Well that kind of luck seems to best be viewed subjectively, lest you fall under depression from not winning as much or more as before. As long as you win anything, I would consider that lucky one way or another.

Although winning $100 000 USD in one go is quite amazing. Not as amazing as a lottery win of millions or even hundred of millions but still very life changing, especially if the winner is living in a poorer country in which one could live a very comfortable life with 100k.

We may have luck or not have luck. But better to try than not to try. The people who do not try will definitely not win.

I am thinking about setting up a new type game for decentralized and non-custodial crypto gambling. One which combines investing in new (blockchain or non blockchain) start-ups. Eventually we will partner with start ups who will offer winning bonuses to the winners (and perhaps even the losers), in exchange the partnered start-up will be gaining marketing exposure and public audit data from the community.

You can join a bet AGAINST or FOR the success of start-up companies.

But before I start offering this idea of mine in the gambling section, I would very much like to hear feedback and I appreciate any tips or advice you  guys can give me.

Explaination:

Basically you profit twice, if you win:

- 1x from winning the bet and receiving the loser bet funds.
- 1x from the optional bonuses offered by partnered start-ups (for example: winners receive free extra BTC and the privilege of investing into company shares at discounted rates - Rules and Guidelines TBA.)

How the game works:

Obviously there are two groups for betting: either "Vest" or "No Vest". It will be based on a pot system with "No Vest" or "Vest" betting sides. "No Vest" pot is for betting that a certain startup-project's roadmap goal will not be reached in a fixed amount of time, (to be pre-bet specified by the start-up's officially given deadline). The "Vest" betting group will gamble on the roadmap's goals being met in time by putting their bets in their fund pot. The winning group will receive the other group's funds.

This goals of the roadmap must be defined within specified boundaries by the community and agreed upon by the start-up.

The distribution of winnings will follow a simple formula:

If your group loses the bet, the money you betted will be forfeited to the adversary group but you may receive bonuses for gambling, based on how much you bet.
If your group wins the bet, then you will receive: P*b/B of adversary pot's funds with P = all adversary pot funds, b = (your) individual bet amount and B = total fund amount in your group's pot.

Example:

You bet 100 USD in the "Vest group" of "Start-Up X" because you believe that the start-up can achieve their first working MVP withing 3 months. The entire "Vest Group Pot" is $1000 USD. The adversary group, "No Vest" loses their 3000 USD pot because the start up reached its goal of completing a working MVP with all the demanded specifications. So the winners are the "Vest Group" and you receive  1/10th of that 3000 USD. So 300 USD winnings. Yay.

In order to automate the process, I will need to learn the process and future requirements for developing an automated platform with voting mechanisms which regulate the process. I will escrow the Pot Funds until then, in the beginning of alpha phase.

The funds will be Bitcoin and at a later time, other altcoin options will be implemented, as well as a house coin/token (TBA) consolidated by underlying Bitcoin assets

Basically this new gambling will be based on helping new start-ups gain exposure and give the investors a community based audit system provided by the gambling community and gambling community. Thereby greatly outsourcing project research efforts and project audits to the community.


Business plan:

Winnings will be deducted by escrow service fee of 0.9% + transaction cost and sent to your specified Bech-32 Bitcoin address.  

Of course before I start this gambling service I will inform myself of the regulatory requirements. Although once it goes decentralized and non custodial, I am sure we will see the easing of government regulations.

I will be using this thread to keep everyone updated.

He insults everyone. He insulted me too so I just put him on my ignore list with all the other loud children.

I think that is quite correct and rightly so. The gambling service providers are being pressured into following rigid guidelines on how they conduct their business, whether online or offline, does not really matter. If anything, online can become a bigger legal mess due to the fact that some countries have different regulations and one cannot just offer them services that they are not allowed to buy.

Its the regulators and the governments which is to blame here. Just send an short message explaining the entire situation and wait for the reply. Bothering the team on Twitter or some other platform only slows down the work and confuses people.

Its a bit ironic that the actor warning everyone of financial fraud is using his current, outrageous PR, after having participated in said fraud, for selling a book that he wrote on said financial fraud. So basically he is using a scam to sell his book but is pretending like he is doing something heroic... Interesting.

He obviously only cares about selling his own book even if it means spreading home-brewed FUD. What an absolute tool.

I would recommend everyone not to listen to actors for advice on investments, economics or fintech.

I think that might be severely underestimating what it means to be at the very top of one's career, as Ronaldo is and has been for years now. Too many people are putting age over everything else. A younger football player does not automatically make him a better football player. Throughout the years Ronaldo has been gathering experience and training that the young Ronaldo did not have. So if a young Ronaldo played against the current Ronaldo, I think the older one would win.

Why are people throwing a 37 year old down into the trash just because he is a bit older but still young? Would a few years make a huge difference here?

Well then by the very same logic there is no point in gambling because most probably you will lose more money than you make. But that does sound a bit backwards, doesn't it? Even if gambling is not profitable, thats not why we gamble. Its putting an investment into a small hope. Personally, I try to see gambling as fun because otherwise it becomes frustrating and what is better: losing money and having fun or losing money and not having fun?

Well hold on now. Would it be possible, technically, if for example he lived in a small village with a computer and a landline but without internet, and he had a fax machine, could he not develop a method of connecting the reconfigured fax to a node (which has internet access) through that landline and the node would broadcast to the blockchain? Technically he would be sending Bitcoin payments without internet connection.

Well no, nobody has ever lost Bitcoins before. They may have had them stolen or they lost their key, but lost? Nope. Those coins are exactly where they were put last. And before you ask, yes, I have lost a key before but the amount of coin was very negligible. So suffice it to say, I have lost maybe... 200 USD worth in Bitcoin which would be worth around 2k or more at today's price.

Lesson learned: do not lose keys.