His mind will change with time, if it hasn't already. What I think is that this image is outdated. If he was saying it 5 years ago, it would probably be correct to think that it is stupid to gamble in KYC casinos, but nowadays where it is more and more common, and with the trend that is taking us to more and more KYC, it is not that it is stupid or not, it is that in a few years there will be no non-KYC sites that can operate in most countries, as they do now.

Yes, the truth is that if I go on a trip and go sightseeing, I don't even think about gambling, not even in the casino. For me playing poker, which is 99% of my gambling, is like a job, it is a regular activity that I do to earn money. So if I go on vacation I think about tourism, not about working. The only exceptions would be, as you say, going to Macau or Las Vegas, where I would go to the casinos, of course.

I am not going to analyze what has gone before, especially since the colonial era.

What I will say is that Truss is an embarrassed Torie, as happens in many right-wing politicians who at the slightest criticism by someone from the left are ashamed.

Lowering taxes and cutting government spending always works. However it seems she was more concerned about diversity, quotas and not getting criticized too much than implementing what actually works.

In this regard I leave here Laffer's analysis of the situation, who has recently published a book "Taxes have consequences".

‘Bidenomics’ have thrown the US into a ‘tizzy’: Laffer

Vouch for naim027? A guy who has cheated in every possible way?

You can vouch all you want, but it is useless.

Naim027 committed alt abuse, plagiarized repeatedly, evaded and cheated the ban in every possible way (sending PMs, dealing with other matters and farming up alts).

The bad thing is that he is very good at convincing people that he is a good person.

Naim027 is a disgrace to this forum.

If there are, I am not aware of them, at least not in such large numbers. But it is logical that I do not know much since I do not pay attention to "cryptocurrencies". I have long been interested only in Bitcoin and nothing else. I guess these pyramid scams are kind of get rich quick schemes where naive people want to find a quick way out of their problems by getting rich, and end up worse.

That's why tournaments are the variety of poker that most attracts people who don't know how to play very well. A very famous case at the time was that of Chris Moneymaker in 2003, who at the time was an amateur, but today is a professional. It was a case that is considered to have marked the beginning of the online poker boom, as it incited many amateurs to imitate his case.

I talked about this recently in another thread:




I don't know if you're referring to how it works where you live, but in regulated Europe you have to pass KYC before you can bet with money. Without KYC you can still bet with play money but to play with money you have to send ID card or passport and maybe some other documents. Apart from that, Pokerstars has a great anti-fraud department.

In principle I would be in favor of putting some limit on the creation of alts but I think LoyceV is right that it could not be enforced. It would make things a bit more difficult, yes, but not much.

Well, I leave religious questions aside. That the man earned that amount is a statistical event like any other. Improbable, yes, but with all the people in the world betting on games like the lottery, by pure statistical probability, someone will end up winning.

Regarding telling, I think it is better to keep a low profile and tell as few people as possible. What happens is that just when the amount is bigger, which is when you should keep it secret, it is more difficult to hide it.

LOL. 

I laughed so hard reading that garbage article that I could hardly breathe. It is such a nonsense that I don't even know where to start.

So the hyper-regulated Europe with high taxes is going to compete with Sillicon Valley? If it ends up doing so, it is probably not so much Europe's merit, as Sillicon Valley is not what it used to be, with an increasingly socialist California pushing companies out:

Why Silicon Valley Companies Are Moving to Texas.

Let's continue.

“Where Europe is leading compared to the US is in ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) and climate strategy,”

In other words, the garbage energy policy that, exacerbated by the war in Ukraine, is leading to production cuts, company closures and energy bills multiplied by three or four times, which means that a lot of people will not be able to heat their homes in Europe for the first time in decades.

All this comes from a quasi-hippie who cares more about diversity than talent? Yes, you see that a lot in Europe. Filling jobs not with the best, but with x profiles to reach the diversity quota.

And to top it all off, in his socialist vision he only had to talk about how bad capital is:

 "Globally, VCs and technology companies became addicted to wealth creation, he believes, at the expense of innovation and purpose."

As if it were contradictory. Lol.

Well, in my case it is clear that it is Poker but it is also clear that I am not Daniel Negreanu. If I were to count my life total it would be many thousands, a few tens of thousands. I've been stuck at a NLHE 6 max cash level for a while now, a bit out of laziness and also because every day the tables are harder and you have to work harder to earn the same or less, and I make around 2 or 3 thousand a year.

In my case I prefer that if they are going to ask for KYC they do it during registration, not after if I have earned a certain amount, and I voted for that option. What happens is that the casinos know that if they implement this measure they would lose a considerable amount of business.

In general, a responsible gambler should read the TOS and know that they can ask for KYC. If you do not like KYC there are still some casinos that have not implemented it, and I say still because I am afraid they will be less and less, in the same way that today they are much less than 5 years ago.

Reversed? Well, I think it will be exactly the opposite. As the years go by, casinos that do not require KYC will be reduced to a minimum, if not disappear altogether.

We come from a time when Bitcoin and cryptocurrency casinos were like the Wild West, but as civilization progresses, there is more control.

Speaking of scumbag. Does anyone doubt that at this very moment Naim027, AnotherAlt, etc. that scumbag is already farming up another account or two?


I also agree. With a rule something like, "if I get a permaban you can't appeal within the one year period except to show that, in fact, a mistake has been made." I say that because sometimes a mistake can be made. But not appeal to say that it would be more positive for the community to have your account restored.


Yes, there have been a few little secrets around here lately. And instead of regretting it, I'm glad I revealed one myself.

I've been doing DCA for a while now, with the S&P 500 and Bitcoin, although I've been with the S&P for quite a bit longer. I haven't heard about the "DCA out" thing and searching the internet, I don't see much information about it either. But I will explain it as I see it.

Let's assume you have $200 a month to invest, then the DCA is simply that, investing $200 for months and months, years and years. The thing is, DCA is usually more complicated than that. The example I gave is fine if you want the money for retirement and don't want to touch it for many years, but what usually happens is this: first, the amount available to invest varies. Maybe you have more income and can invest more. Or the other way around.

It could also be that you had money that you used for something else but in times of bear market like now, you see that the price is cheap and you take advantage of it to buy more, for example $300 a month. Or you received a lump sum. Let's say you already have $10k accumulated but you receive $2k that you can invest and you decide to do so.

So the DCA would be to make more or less regular purchases but taking advantage of bear markets to invest more, and, what happens in bull markets? The opposite. You  can imagine that you have been investing for years and you have accumulated $10k today, but in the next cycle the price goes up a lot and in 2025 you have $200k. Then, unless you have planned to use that investment exclusively for retirement, it makes sense to sell part of your investment to take advantage of profits, say $50k, with which you would still have $150k invested and you would continue making DCA month by month.

It sounds to me that JayJuanGee has made a few posts explaining this style of investing.

Speculating about what would have happened if what happened had not happened is part of philosophical thinking. You are not going to reach any conclusion by understanding conclusion as something derived from a scientific reasoning process.

So I leave you to speculate about the counterfactual you propose. I prefer to focus on what is happening in the world today and what may happen in the future.

Urban farming is fine for entertainment but there's no way you're going to produce a significant amount of food to feed yourself.

I like to buy organic, sustainably grown produce but with almost 8 billion people living on earth, the only way to feed them all is with intensive monoculture farming on huge tracts of land with the use of herbicides, insecticides and pesticides. More sustainable crops have been making inroads as there is more demand from people who don't mind paying more for better quality produce.

Or it could also indicate that 0.05 Bitcoin is not a big amount of money for you, and that you don't mind losing, in exchange for the fun of playing again and being able to win the full price. I see that in the results the split the price is narrowly winning, and it is logical, because in general 0.05 Bitcoin is an important amount of money, and people prefer to make sure they get it rather than to risk losing it for a bigger prize.

In my case, playing poker, I tend to play one hour sessions, whether I have bad luck and lose 5 stacks in the first 100 hands or the other way around (I play online and in one hour I can play 500 hands).

The point is to play EV+ and for that the short-term results do not matter. Normally if I win I don't alter the session, I play for about 1 hour, then I rest and then I can play again.

The only time I can end the session earlier is when I am on a bad streak and I am having bad results in the session, nothing good comes in, because to play good poker you have to be emotionally neutral and you have to make decisions based on mathematical calculation and intuition, but if the bad results can alter that thought process and affect you emotionally, it is better to stop.

You already opened a similar thread in the past and we discussed this. It seems that you are determined and you feel like doing it, so cheer up.

In that thread, as far as I remember, I already told you that if you intend to be self-sufficient, either you will have to reduce the variety of foods you eat, or if you intend to eat with variety, even if it is somewhat less than now, you will have to have so much land that you will not be able to work it on your own, far from it.

If you eat bread every day, or pasta etc. and intend to continue to do so, prepare a good amount of land to plant wheat. But then, harvest it, grind it, and start making homemade bread every day. To eat protein, if you don't want to have a lot of work, you're going to have to keep chickens alone. Well, if you want to keep pigs, sheep, cows, etc., it will be so much work that I doubt you will have much time to grow vegetables.

Anyway, if you decide to farm, I hope you will inform us, but self-sufficiency is much more difficult than one might think. You will most likely be able to survive but at the cost of little nutritional variety.

I'm sure you have no idea what it's like to grow almond trees.

To grow almond trees you first have to have a piece of land, if you don't have it, you will have to buy it. Of course, agricultural land is a lot cheaper than building land, and it will depend a lot on the area, but get the idea that you will have to pay thousands of $ at a minimum.

Then you will have to pay for some almond trees that are already somewhat grown. I hope you are not planning to plant them with a seed because you can wait many years until you see some production and if they are seeds of a hybrid they will not produce much.

You can grow them without irragation, but if you want to produce to the maximum you will have to install an irrigation system, which implies a cost to install the system and to pay for the water.

Doing all this, with which you will already have to make a good initial investment, you will not see a decent production until 3 years later.

And all of this is only if you don't get a disease that kills them, such as Xylella fastidiosa, and all your investment goes to shit. This can typically happen with vines, almond or olive trees.

And then there is working the field, which will cost you money and time, unless you want to hire out all the work, which will cost you more money.

If more and more people are leaving the countryside, it is for a reason. I don't see that in the future the prices of farm products are supposedly going to rise extraordinarily and exponentially. Surely they will rise, yes, as they are already doing, but if they rise too much, people will not be able to pay them and therefore they will not be able to continue rising.

In this regard, I have left one thing unsaid before: thefts. Pray that they do not steal all your production, or if you want to take measures to prevent them from stealing it, it will cost you more money.

Or maybe you prefer to spend the harvest season with a rifle in your field.