Good point. But as for believing in superstitions, I think, to a large degree, it's a choice rather than anything else. It's a comfortable feeling to believe that certain behaviour or items can give you an edge in life by bringing good luck. Or it's convenient to shift the blame/responsibility to bad luck, i.e. why blame yourself and your crappy driving for crashing the car when you could blame some black cat or Friday 13th?

I agree that constant issues with hot wallets being empty is not a good sign and indicates that maybe Bitvest should revise their approach and maybe increase the level of hot wallet balances.
All I was saying is that occasional issues with empty hot wallets are somewhat normal and are inevitable for that type of business. Let's remember there are probably only 1-2 people with wallet access and they can't be around 24/7 to replenish them immediately.
So it all boils down to how often such issues occur really.

No idea how this is going to unfold, but I think there's a zero chance the SEC will provide any clear rules. I expect they'll either provide a vague response, or just won't respond at all. What's the worst that could happened to them if they don't? They get fined and pay with tax payers' money?
Anyhow, they have time till 13th May, so only 2 days from now.
Apparently, some crypto-groups are piling in in support of Coinbase:
https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/05/11/coinbases-sec-complaint-draws-allies-depicting-us-regulator-as-crypto-bully/

and here's the Coinbase's petition:
https://www.sec.gov/rules/petitions/2022/petn4-789.pdf

No one will take you seriously with statements like this one. That would mean their entire army would be long gone (for every killed soldier there are around 3-4 wounded).

But as they say, during the war the truth dies first. It's really hard to get any reliable estimates of casualties on both sides, and even the leaked Pentagon docs (or at least media reports on them) are very inconsistent, but are citing somewhere around 30-40k of Russians killed in action.

Unfortunately, our brains are wired in a way that if you've took some action and got desired result (positive feedback loop), you'll feel the urge to do it again. So if someone had the discipline to stop betting in the right time and walked away with profit - they're likely to return and try to repeat that success.
Gambling perfectly exploits psychological flaws.

One could argue if the sample is representative (I think it is for the purpose of comparison of men Vs women performance), but in terms of sample size - it's definitely not small. Some would say it's actually too large. A sample of 1,000 respondents is considered large and anything above that won’t add much to the accuracy and would just unnecessarily add to the time and the costs.


It's not that shocking if you consider the results were very close for men and women and that the people surveyed likely represented retail investors, when the passive approach is often the most rewarding (just buy and hold). I'm sure the results would be largely different for professional investors.

The idea of having hot wallets is to not keep significant amounts in there, which means they could get drained when there's a big excess of withdrawals over deposits (e.g. when someone wins big and withdraws).
So I wouldn't judge the site on the fact that hot wallets get empty from time to time, but you could judge them on how fast they respond to the situation.
Have you contacted customer service? Any luck?

Even the not-so-bitcoin-friendly World Economic Forum recognised that Bitcoin mining can be a good thing and praised it for using energy from recycled waste gas. Of course, they managed to do it without mentioning Bitcoin or Bitcoin mining at all (referred to data centres instead) but still.
More details in this thread:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5450069.0

The problem with conventional warfare is that it requires a lot of men willing and able to fight. With a prolonged conflict the number of dead and terminally wounded piles up. So even assuming they have the technology and resources to buy/produce equipment, they could simply run out of fighting-age men at some point. Drafting too many civilians could cause further disruptions to normal, daily operations (i.e. shortage of workers).

Russia seems to be managing the sanctions way better than anyone (in the West) expected, but to say they're economically strong is just too far-fetched.

Slightly misleading. According to the bankruptcy filing, they indeed have $500 to $1 billion of liabilities, but also $500 to $1 billion in assets. So we don't really know what their net position is. It's fair to assume they're in net liabilities, otherwise probably wouldn't file for the bankruptcy.

That's a bit of a weird statement. Both strategies (flat bets and martingale) have exactly the same odds and in the long-run, your net result (profit or loss) should be exactly the same in both cases.
The only difference is psychological and depends on your discipline, e.g. in flat betting, it might be easier to stop and accept the loss.

Just to clarify, is any income under 1 sat ignored/lost, or does it cumulate and is paid out when after reaching the 1 sat threshold?
i.e. the minimum to earn BTC is 30k sats. At 4.08% p.a. that's 3.35 sats/day. 25% commission is 0.84. So referrer won't get paid for the first day, but will they get paid anything on day 2 (when commission cumulates to above 1 sat)?
Or what if someone has say 5 referrals each holding the minimum of 30k sats? Will the referrer get paid anything, or do they have to wait till the daily commission from each individual referral is 1 sat or above?


How can you be sure that your referrals are holding above the 30k sats (the minimum to earn interest)? You're not using multiple accounts, are you?

Not to defend the Guardian, but where did you get that information about them being funded by the HSBC from?
They are owned by "The Scott Trust Limited", which, despite the name is probably not even a trust but a regular private company limited by shares. The Scott Trust Limited does not appear to have any corporate shareholders, only individuals:

What do you mean by rejected the petition? I believe the court has ordered SEC to provide response to Coinbase:
https://www.coindesk.com/business/2023/05/04/us-court-orders-sec-to-respond-to-coinbase-allegations-within-10-days/
I don't think they have responded already, at least I can't find any info on that. And if they provide an official response but fail to clarify anything (not sure if they can do it), then, I'd imagine it would work in favour of Coinbase, should SEC decide to start a lawsuit against them.
Some lawyers already predict that SEC will lose in court:
https://news.bitcoin.com/lawyer-expects-sec-to-lose-if-it-sues-coinbase-due-to-fatal-flaw-of-gary-genslers-own-making/

The Guardian is known for their left-leaning political stance, even if they were entirely community-funded, they'd still have to cater to their donors, who are also majority left-leaning and most likely fully on board (and non-critical) of the "green" agenda.

But looks like they are still pretty reliant on advertising revenue, judging by their latest available financial statements:

Thanks for sharing.
So, if I'm reading them right, those bills essentially only prevent discrimination of digital mining and want it to be treated at par with other, similar types of businesses, but they don't propose any preferential treatment for miners, just give them a bit of regulatory stability.

Some people might, but they'll walk away after they get burnt once or twice and realise they are the ones who are being dumped on.
Good content creators have a much higher chance of long-term success, if they're consistent in putting in effort and doing proper research before publishing the content.

If we ask in this thread, probably not many of us here would actually be subscribed to x1000-pump-type channels.

It kind of is unusual, if we're talking about active trading (or speculation if you will). As men are naturally less emotional and more analytical, they are more driven into active trading. As a result, there are way more men traders than women, and the top of traders (with the best results) would likely be men in a vast majority.
But the survey discussed here covers more of a passive traders (so more of a holders than speculators), where patience and a passive approach often turns out to be an advantage.

I think nothing has damaged the SEC's reputation as badly as this whole crypto-security-or-not situation.
Remember that Gensler is just a face for the SEC, but it's not like he's solely responsible for the lack of clear policies. There's something deeper going on there for sure.
I think they're just trying to assess the implications of deciding either way. But I won't be surprised if they throw Gensler under a bus eventually to try to regain credibility.

Meanwhile, a Coinbase finally lost their patience and decided to sue SEC in hopes to get the court to force SEC to give Coinbase a clear answer to their petition (after being ignored for months).
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/24/coinbase-sues-sec-after-months-of-silence-from-federal-regulator.html

"Influencer" is a broad term and I wouldn't put all crypto-related content creators with high number of subscribers/followers into one bag. I'm not going to advertise any channel but there are a few out there that are pretty decent in terms of creating good-value content.
Those who exist only to squeeze out the maximum profit out of their followers, usually have short-life as people tend to turn away from them.