Here most of you seem to be downplaying the importance of this but I am seeing quite a bit about that AI lately and it seems to me that there is going to be a before and after about this. For starters it's going to put a lot of programmers out of work people are saying.

On the forum, maybe now you can discern the messages from an AI, but you have to think they keep learning and improving day by day.

I remember not too long ago, like 5 years ago, people were still downplaying the importance of machine translators. How many people used automatic translators 5 years ago in the forum and how many use them now? They still have bugs, but much less than 5 years ago and they are getting better and better every day.

I have seen posts from people testing AI on other forums and although to some extent it is discernible, in other cases it is not so clear and there is a lot of content.

Give this a few years and we could see an AI in the top ten merit earned ranking on bpip.org

Does anyone think this is not feasible? If it isn't today, it's only a matter of time before it is.

However, I don't think it's necessarily bad, as I see people say when they see what it's capable of doing, well no I'm not a Luddite. But I think we will have to be attentive to how this evolves, which will undoubtedly affect many areas of our lives, and the forum as well, if only because we talk about it.

 

The thing is as simple as if you have Bitcoin that you have acquired at $16k and when you buy something the price is at $17k, the government will want to charge you capital gains tax. This apart from the VAT on the product or service in question.

This would be very cumbersome to control and would force people to carry some control software.

Imagine how difficult it is to control by hand that you have a bitcoin bought at various prices and you go and pay for a coffee, the supermarket, a meal, the bus, etc. with Bitcoin. At each time you pay the price would be different.

That is why many of us advocate the establishment of a minimum exemption, which at some point there has been talk that could be $200, below which there would be no legal obligation to report transactions, but I see it difficult, because when you buy a coffee you might not have to report it but the coffee shop does have to report each sale, and with the ever increasing collection eagerness of the various states I think it will come to nothing.

That's what I thought. When I have entered casinos without an app, usually cryptocurrency casinos, I have not encountered any problems. The design is good and there is no need for an app. Anyway the functionalities are also reduced no matter how cool the app is, like the Pokerstars app, which in the end I never use.

No single one is the best, and you don't have to think of anything too sophisticated. However, if I had to choose one, I would say spend less than you earn. The moment you become interested in personal finance, it leads to a series of further consequences. At first people think about saving, cutting expenses, but over time you end up having new ideas and striving to increase income as well. So what happens to someone who controls expenses, increases income and is financially savvy? Very easily, he gets richer.

I don't know how it occurs to you to post such fascist propaganda on this forum. USA doesn't need more houses, it needs the ones that are already there to be better distributed, it needs some laws to prohibit people from owning more than two houses and put more taxes on their ownership, blah, blah blah blah.

Now seriously, why do you think California has such high RE prices? Because of junk regulations and high taxes. Solving the housing problem both supply and price is as easy as removing regulations and lowering taxes. Add to that cutting government spending and states like California would go back to being net receivers of people instead of having an exodus of people fleeing. That is what needs to be done and not

In general I believe that if you are doing well financially, it is good to donate money/bitcoin/whatever to help others and I lead by example. Apart from occasional extraordinary donations, I donate to a charity I trust (using fiat) every month. It is an expense that I have set for myself as a fixed one, like paying the electricity bill.

As I'm normally a bit skeptical, I will say that I doubt whether the OP's thread starts from a sincere opinion or from the merit requirements of the campaing he is participating in. The merit requirement for this week already has it but there is a possible bonus.

Anyway, let's give him the benefit of the doubt.

What he wants is to open a debate. So let's debate.


In an ideal world it would be better, what happens is that if you have someone hungry in front of you, he will not pay attention to you if you try to teach him something because he only thinks about food. So it is better to give food to the hungry and establish teaching them how to fish as a medium term plan.


Sure, you're going to teach a poor person who needs charity to eat a lot of things about financial freedom. Come on! Giving him a paper wallet is completely useless, because as soon as he learns what it is, what he will do is change it to fiat to be able to pay for food, or if we think of a worse case scenario, alcohol or drugs.

I've just tagged the three of them, but I doubt very much that we will be able to catch many cases.

I guess this is a consequence of your weekly merit requirement for the campaign.

This is something I understand you did with good intentions to ensure a quality campaign. But if I, who earn merits at almost double the rate the activity, quit a campaign of yours because I wasn't sure I could meet the requirement every week, things like this don't surprise me.

Do you think that in general the rule has been positive?

Lol. I have been about to overquote this.

Has Royse777 miraculously gone without negative feedback? I guess it's a mistake. I've looked at it three times to see if it was me not seeing it. I've put him on ignore by the way, for being cocky.

What he may say has the same credibility as that of some of the scum that swarm the forum and some of those in cahoots with him: in other words, none.

I already commented it some time ago in another thread: I remember seeing in an interview a psychiatrist saying that very rarely people who commit crimes admit they have done something wrong. In other words, the one who rapes a 9 year old girl justifies it by saying that she "provoked him", and things like that.

That's why I'm not surprised that now this asshole comes out saying that he hasn't done anything wrong. The only thing I hope is that he spends many years in jail.

I'm probably biased but I've never quite understood why people want to take Blackjack seriously.

The OP's image says that the perfect strategy cuts the casino edge to 0.5%. But it is still EV-. You have to learn strategy and card counting, which nowadays is often useless. I think it is worth using that time to learn other games where you can make EV+ moves, earning money regardless of the commissions charged by the casino.

I'm referring to poker obviously, and that's why I say I'm probably biased.

For me casino games, like roulette for example, have a component of entertainment, of fun, and you don't have to make an effort. You don't have to spend hours trying hard to learn roulette strategies (which you're not going to do unless you're a moron). In poker, on the other hand, with study time and effort you make a profit.

With blackjack, despite the effort in learning strategy and card counting,  I doubt that the percentage of people who make a profit is even 1% compared to poker.

No. It is not correct what you say.

What you express is a victim mentality as if not having money is a thing you can't change, as if you are 5'6" tall. Height you can't change, the money you make and how you manage it can.

Without getting into extreme cases, as if you live in the Somali desert, a person who has no money can work harder to get more money, and also start to get rid of debts if you have them, save in investing.

But to do that you need to believe that the future is largely in your hands and not believe that not having money is a catastrophe that you can not change as if lightning strikes you,

That is why there was talk in other threads about the possibility of raising the requirement to be in DT. Such as having a minimum of two inclusions with at least one positive net inclusion as well, but so far theymos has not made a move.

By the way I wanted to comment that I have seen that he has a negative feedback left by Michail1 which is very long. Recently I tried to leave a very long feedback and it wouldn't let me, I got a message saying I had to shorten it. Is there a way to leave very long feedbacks? Or in the case of that feeback is it because before it was allowed and now it is not? The feedback in question is from 2015.

Well, this is nothing new. When I wrote my thread: Goodbye, privacy, goodbye, it was nice while it lasted was because it was already clear to me that the EU considers Bitcoin as an enemy, and that it will only stop considering it as such when it can control it. For example if it gets KYC the majority of transactions.

And now that CBDCs are on their way, they will do everything possible to distinguish the good cryptocurrencies (according to them), which will be the CBDCs and shitcoins that they can control, and the bad ones that will be linked to scams and organized crime, such as Bitcoin and privacy coins.

It's just that I'm not really celebrating. I always saw the threads that were opened before you created this one as a mixture of merit fishing and vanity exhibition, and I never opened a self-congratulatory thread because of that.

Actually it's cool to get to Legendary but it was something that was foreseen to happen because I've had enough merit for a long time and I was going to get there. So it has been rather monotonous, that's why I didn't write a celebration in this thread, it has been rather a confirmation. And that's why I say that I think it's a good idea your thread, to concentrate all these posts here. In fact, if this thread didn't exist, I wouldn't have written anything about having reached Legendary rank.


Let's see if JayJuanGee has notifications turned on and wants to write something about it.

He is, in my opinion, the best merit source, btw, the one who spends the most time reading threads on the forum. Sometimes some old threads, and giving merit to posts he finds to be constructive.

What I have put in bold is a confirmation bias. You have cashed out $1k in the same way you could have cashed out betting alone.


No, it does not minimize them, especially if we talk in percentage terms. If the RTP is 95%, whether you bet with your friends or alone, whether you bet $1k or $1M, the return is 95%. If you mean in absolute terms, how much cash you lose, of course, you lose less in relation to the bet you and your friends have made, but because if you win you will win less too.

If you ask me, I would say that we have most likely already touched the bottom. But simply because of a hunch. It is clear that if we have more negative news, like the many we have had this year, the price can go even lower. But now we are a year and a half away from the next halving, we have suffered a considerable drop from the highs, and a good part of the leverage that caused the catastrophe has already evaporated, so I think we are in a cleaner ecosystem, with a stronger base, on which we can start to rise.

It's not entirely clear to me whether you understood that what I said earlier was irony.

I think it is fine for Biden to approach you, but he is shooting himself in the foot because he is depending on you and Saudi Arabia, who he is begging and they are ignoring him, when he could have all that oil extracted in the USA.

Besides I am sure there are not that many spills in the oil extracted in the USA.

What he is is a hypocrite, because if he is worried about oil affecting the environment he should stop using it, and not ask foreign countries for it instead of extracting it himself.

Best Change defended the business practices quite well the last time there was a similar thread, let's see what he says this time.


That will be in Russia. You're not going to tell me that Binance or Coinbase are not legal are you?

As far as I remember in the other thread what you are describing already happened. A Russian exchange of which it is difficult to find data or any license, demanding KYC, or else they block coins. At the very least it seems morally questionable, and would not be legal in the EU or USA.

But it is not mandatory. The OP can open a thread if he wants, it's not against the rules, and besides there are many people who don't post in the WO because the signature is not visible.

I don't mind speculative threads about price. After all this is the speculation section. It is normal to talk about price rises and falls here.

Regarding what you say OP, I think we will have kind of sideways for a while. Until I see the price go above 30,000 I will not believe we are over the bear market.

This sounds to me like an alt account of some troll.

Just in case it isn't, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say that I don't think it's a good idea to bet on the street, unless it's for small amounts and you know the area.

To begin with, it is easier to get ripped off in the street than in a casino, but if you don't get ripped off and you win, it is not a good idea to be in a street place where everyone can see that you have won a good amount of cash. And even more thinking that most of the neighborhoods where street gambling takes place are usually slums.