Good idea. I donate regularly, and will probably make an extra donation to one of these organizations. Ideally, these people wouldn't need a donation because they all have a way to fend for themselves, but the world we live in is not ideal, so it's worth dedicating a part of your income to help others.

"Proof of Steak", lol, very good, I like it.

Seeing the success the OP has had commenting on his "system", I think he better lock the thread, otherwise he's going to get a million more comments telling him that what he's doing is not a good idea.Especially after the recent events that have even led us to have a visible message at the top of the forum about not leaving our money in online accounts, as piebeyb comments.


I believe it is simply an after-the-fact rationalization to justify his gambling habit.

That thing about losing on purpose is all very well in the movies but I doubt it happens in reality, we're not talking about pool, we're talking about poker. Even the best player in the world loses if he gets bad cards, it doesn't depend on him alone.

And it is even less viable to do it in tournaments, because if he loses all the chips he is eliminated and in tournaments in initial phases it is not so important to win chips as not to lose them.

Well, this happens with most financial assets in the stock market, and it brings me to a political question. 

As much as a certain garbage ideology would have us believe, getting hold of financial assets today is easier than ever. The difference between rich and poor people has always been that the rich have assets, wealth, while the poor live off their work, which gives them just enough to live on. Already in the Middle Ages, successful merchants could climb the social ladder, and since then, the way to climb was to set up a business. But today salaried people can build up a wealth of financial assets, which over the years, with compound interest, becomes considerable. There is no need to set up a business.

50 or 100 years ago, buying shares was impossible for the average Joe because the minimum to buy and the commissions ate him up. But today a citizen with a modest income can buy shares, investment funds and cryptocurrencies with very low amounts, something we see in the forum that people from poor countries do.

Thus, someone with low or middle income can gradually build up a wealth of financial assets, no matter how much they want to sell us a mentality of a victim of the circumstances against which nothing can be done, or worse: you can only wait for a politician to come and save you.

You left out one thing: wagering requirements. If a casino wants to avoid money laundering it is very easy with the wagering requirements that we can see in many ToS. That way no one will try to launder money with the casino because it will be too expensive.


In this you are not right, what money do casinos make without KYC and wagering requirements? Whoever wants to lose track of his money only has to deposit and without wagering anything, withdraw. Deposits go to one address and the withdrawal comes from another address of the casino where the inputs are consolidated and which have no relation to the other. In fact, if the withdrawal is ordered shortly after the deposit, the deposited funds are still in the first direction without moving, thus losing track for an outside observer, and if you do not bet anything, the house does not win anything.

The reasons why a casino may not require KYC or wagering requirements in my opinion are twofold: the first is ideological and the second is to try to attract customers, who do not necessarily want to launder money but who want to gamble in the few remaining casinos without KYC.

The fact is that the regulations are correct. You're not going to openly allow them to bet against themselves and lose, making a lot of money for it. But when there is a law, there are always ways to get around it and whoever has no moral scruples and cares more about money can always do what you say. Most sportsmen will be honest and will not do that for money but whoever wants to can cheat by means of front men.

Of course not, suchmoon.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1595250835096621057?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet%7Ctwtr%5Etrue



Also

https://twitter.com/RichardHanania/status/1595256515463507968?cxt=HHwWgMCjnanWvqMsAAAA


By the way I don't have a twitter account, and I don't care if Musk goes bankrupt, makes money or sticks a SpaceX rocket up his ass and blows himself up but it's clear to me that what bothers many of you is that opinions you don't like are not going to be censored.




Source.

I already posted a video in a previous post. It's not just a matter of ideology, it's a matter of changing everything from top to bottom.

A day in the life of a Twitter employee

I recommend anyone to watch the video, it's only a minute and a half and it gives you an idea of how "productive" was the working day of the former twitter employees, now fired.

I see several things wrong here.

For starters blaming it on luck instead of yourself. Then poor bankroll management and betting more than you can afford or are comfortable losing.

Gambling well done should be considered entertainment that at some point can give you extra money but don't put high hopes on it.

Well, I don't quite agree with the OP's position, as I have said in other posts, because I see that he poses it as an all or nothing and it is not so. There are degrees. Between all of your bitcoin being non-kyc passed through mixers, you run your own node etc., and all of your bitcoin being kyc and on top of that you reuse addresses, there are degrees.

For example. Have non-kyc Bitcoin and have another Bitcoin bought with KYC that has gone from the account of the exchange to a single address of yours, and there has remained only moving to return to the account of the exchange to sell.

Then it also makes me laugh because it reminds me of the fish that is in the fishbowl and thinks that the universe is the fishbowl. Nowadays the element that invades privacy the most is the cell phone that billions of people use without the slightest concern for it. Paying for everything with their cell phones and even posting selfies/videos of everything they do on Instagram/TikTok/Facebook.


This is key and let's talk straight. It is one thing if you are foolish enough to declare in a public forum that you evade taxes, but there is an unwritten law that whoever can avoid paying taxes does so. I have not met anyone who was paid under the table who has gone to declare it. For example, someone who worked as a waiter and was paid in cash without a contract. And as BlackHatCoiner says, even if you are one of that tiny percentage that has a very easy time not declaring without getting caught but you are so honest that you will declare, the government is not going to be happy with you either.

Well, she is an interested party. She is not going to start saying that in that year it will be worth 0 to scare off her investors.

I, while I believe that in the future we are going to have less spectacular returns than in previous cycles, and that this cycle is proof of that, I do not rule out that figure for then, but on the condition that we continue with high inflation.

Think that US inflation has been 8%. I think it will moderate but let's assume it is 5% or more. If it stays at 6 or 7%, by compound interest, $1M then will have half the purchasing power it has now. So, it getting to $0.5M in purchasing power in two cycles doesn't seem so far fetched.

Well, as you may know I don't like Trump too much although I liked some of his policies more than those carried out by Biden, but in this case it's not about Trump, it's about censoring content from a woke perspective.

Now he's kicked those people out, but as far as I know he's not censoring left wing content.


Agreed, I said in a previous comment that I believe they are understaffed now.

The company is not starting from scratch but for him it is starting from scratch, and, yes, I don't rule out that he may have made a fool of himself even though he is rich and has been successful in the past, but I will wait and see how it goes.


Good point. That way you're going to be right no matter what, lol.

The same argument could be applied to bankrupt exchanges. If instead of making a fool of themselves they had dedicated themselves to attracting clients and charging commissions they would have done better, because they are sure profits, but many are tempted by leverage and pump shitcoins/tokens so that their wealth, at least on paper, rises faster.

In principle I am not worried about casinos operating a ponzi scheme like some exchanges but it is not out of the question. I am sure that for example 1xCrap does it.

No really. He did not already mention it. He edited the text after I asked him the question:

https://loyce.club/archive/posts/6132/61327770.html


Well, I'm not going to do it because I have an Acrobat Pro license, but besides, you don't even need it nowadays. Google lens for example does the same for you, and I'm sure that if I start searching I'll find a few more apps that do the same for me.

I suppose someone might find it useful, but it's not for me. Good luck.

Having them assist you is coaching and is usually paid for separately. It's one thing to have a few courses that you can self-learn with, and another to have player support, which usually includes a review of your database to look for leaks, from the same database choose hands to review with you, connect with you live while you play to monitor and comment afterwards, and follow up after the initial advice.

It is usually much more expensive than poker courses and is usually taken when you have climbed levels and are stagnating.

What can you do that I can't do with Acrobat Pro?

Look, I have had very heated discussions with suchmoon, but we have never reached the point of insult, so you better keep these things to yourself if you want to debate. Otherwise I'll put you on ignore.


Of course, of course. I have hardly seen you on the forum and from what you say here I already deduce that you are a socialist.

Answer me one thing: what do you care if he throws the money away?

I'd better wait a year or two to check that supposed objectivity you are talking about.

Well, obviously not. I spend about 10 hours a week playing poker, so not too much, and, above all, it gives me profits, contrary to what usually happens with people addicted to gambling. I think it's more like a part-time job, in that I'm guided mainly by rational decisions rather than emotions, as gamblign addicts tend to be.

I have a question because yesterday I sent a transaction with the minimum fee, when the mempool was almost empty, with about 1,500 pending transactions. The next block took more than half an hour to confirm and by then there were more than 5,000 transactions almost all with a higher fee than the minimum, but what was my surprise when my transaction was confirmed in the next block. In other words, mine was confirmed at the minimum rate and there were about two thousand at a higher rate that were not confirmed.

Does anyone know why this happened? As far as I know, miners give priority to transactions with higher fees, but sometimes they may be interested in confirming transactions with lower fees, for example if the miner himself has sent a lot of transactions with the minimum fee to consolidate.

But in my case I can't explain why it happened. Was it by mistake?

I am surprised by this exaggerated statement. It wouldn't be that you don't like his ideology or that for example, he would like to reinstate Trump's account and the rest is an after-the-fact rationalization?

To say that about the richest guy in the world is surprising, to say the least.

THE REAL-TIME BILLIONAIRES LIST

Although in his case he has also been greatly benefited by the massive printing policies that have made his companies trade at very high P/E ratios, as I commented in my previous post, but, come on, painting him as someone who has no idea about business saying that a 5 year old would do better.... I'd better wait and see where twitter is in a year. As you are well aware, many companies operate at a loss in the early stages and I'm sure he has a plan going forward.

What I see that he has done is to get rid of the socialists, and I think that is what bothers many of you.

Let's see if getting rid of all the people who were going to the office for entertainment and to censor what the democrats didn't like has worked out well for him or not.

For me, twitter is a clear case of what a book called "Bullshit jobs". It is clear that now they are understaffed, but in that company worked many people who were dedicated to do basically nothing and we can see an example in the following video:

A day in the life of a Twitter employee

These companies may have been inflated by the massive printing we have had in the last few years, which caused technology stocks to continue to keep rising even when trading at outrageous P/E ratios.

This is in terms of workers. And cost control in other aspects? I find it hard to believe this tweet from Musk, but I have no way of verifying it, and given how overstaffed they were, I wouldn't be surprised: