With fees so high, I'm wondering if big gamblers are switching from BTC/ETH to other options. Is there any data on what's being used? With limited options, what coins should a new platform consider supporting?
Most gamblers that I know are currently adopting ETH big time. Just take a look at all the Youtube gambling channels, a lot of them use Exodus to hold their ETH. BTC is sort of reserved for the few elite whales now, or for people who are willing to wait hours for their deposit to be finally credited to their accounts. LTC/Doge also has some sort of a following, although certainly not to the extent of ETH. I would like to see IOTA being used given that it does not have any transaction fees, but not sure if their infrastructure is well developed enough yet. |
|
|
|
|
When I first got into dicing the faucets at PD were quite generous (0.0001 BTC regularly for whitelisted accounts, IIRC).
I've gotten that amount up to 0.05 BTC before, and I've seen others get it into 0.1+ BTC without busting. Of course the rate of BTC at that time was nowhere near where it is right now, but it was still quite a sizable chunk considering that it was purely from faucet earnings.
Never really bothered with first-deposit bonuses though. I'm sure people have had success with them but I personally am not that big of a fan for the turnover requirements.
|
|
|
|
If a crypto project gets too complicated to understand can it affect the projects adoption rate or people don't care this days where they put their money? I remember when Hex was launched many think it's a scam and so many complains about not understanding a thing about what the project is all about, what do you say ?
Yes, absolutely. The technology can be as convoluted as the founders please in order to achieve their ends. But when it comes to PR, the project's mission and solution must be able to be communicated extremely concisely and simply. People's attention spans are low and with the abundance of altcoins out there, they don't want a 100-page academic paper on why this is the best coin. They adopt on the premise of realistic promises that can be summed up in a sentence or two. |
|
|
|
|
For sure.
For most altcoins, even though they are nominally decentralised, a part of the value that they pose comes from the development team that's backing the project.
By going anonymous the project is essentially forgoing that part of their value, and any investors who decide to take part would also be worse off as a result. This is not to mention the hundreds (if not thousands) of ICO scams in 2017-18 that involved fake/anonymous teams. Do not invest.
|
|
|
|
|
I can say for almost certain that regulatory efforts that try to restrict access to gambling almost always go to waste.
Some exposure to elements of gambling is going to be inevitable for a minor. Trying to control that exposure works to an extent, but beyond that it is really not that productive.
All the KYC in the world won't be able to stop a delinquent teenager. Regulators doing this is simply avoiding the root cause of financial illiteracy and a basic grounding in maths in the youth populations.
|
|
|
|
I had a BTC 1 year cloud mining contract with Hashflare in 2018, then BTC crashed and they suspended BTC mining 2-3 months into mining and suspended withdrawals so I couldn't move the BTC that was mined out. I tried to log back in recently and my account is inactive and Hashflare support is not helping me. Is there a way to get my BTC back?
Look, Hashflare is known for playing dirty games like these. I remember that they used to offer lifetime mining contracts, but in reality they would expire way before even a year would elapse simply due to the exorbitant maintenance fees that have been inbuilt into their scheme. Your chances at legal recourse is very slim considering that they are not really a regulated investment entity... Take this as a lesson against cloud mining, and run as far as you can from it. |
|
|
|
'prediction in itself is abnormal and it only takes one who is abnormal to make a proper, close to or successful prediction often'. Why? I asked and he said,
'Because to an insane person, it comes without dought in contrast to a sane person' Makes absolutely zero sense. The probabilities of an insane person winning at a game of pure chance is precisely the same as the probabilities achieved by a sane person. Neither of them can predict with certainty what the next roll holds for them. If you think otherwise, you're the madman - it's basic laws of maths. |
|
|
|
|
You're absolutely right.
People staring at 10m candles trying to analyse for some sort of pattern are generally missing a range of long term indicators that will crush their position in due course. It is also super difficult to do evidence based TA - which is why being in for the long haul is generally more favourable as an investor.
And yes, I fully anticipate there to be a 40%+ (perhaps even more) correction coming as a matter of time. Markets are already extremely frothy as is, and by the end of the bull market there's going to be a ton of weak hands holding onto unaffordable positions.
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
I'm looking to understand how Bitcoin casinos work and how next roll game predictions work?
Bitcoin is a relatively new thing and it can be very difficult to understand. There are literally casinos popping up now...
If anyone has any information on it, it would be much appreciated.
Bitcoin is completely unrelated to how casinos generate their rolls - unless you're talking about a site like Chain-bet, in which case they simply take the last digit of each bitcoin block hash (which is random) and take that to determine outcomes. I suggest you take a look at how provably fair systems work. From the gambler's perspective, you don't really need to know the technicalities. Just know that you are able to verify each roll using your client and server seeds after the event to make sure that the casino is not cheating you. |
|
|
|
Hello everyone! Do you think it is possible to beat european roulette wheel with 37 numbers? Personally, at one time I tried to get up on the faucets, nothing came of it. I tried different strategies, all strategies lead to a loss sooner or later. Not so long ago, I went to a well-known crypto casino and decided to play with a 15-bet Martingale. Set the autospin to double in color with a drop of + 100%. It took about 5 minutes and I got the opposite color 15 times and I lost everything. To calculate the house edge for Straight Up bets in roulette, all you have to do is divide the difference of 1 by the number of the pockets on the wheel, which in this case is 37. So, 1/37 = 0.027027027 which makes for 2.70% ( 0.027027027 x 100 = 2.70270). There is also American roulette with two zeros and high house edge. The house edge on all bets is 1/19, or 5.26%, except for the 0-00-1-2-3 combination, which carries a house edge of 7.89%. Let's discuss roulette, who had what wash and experience in roulette.
Nope. Each bet that you take on will be -EV. It doesn't matter if you are prepped for 15 reds in a row or not. There is a tiny, tiny chance that you will get any arbitrary amount of losses that makes martingale or any other strategy unfeasible unless you have an infinite bankroll. I think that every gambler undergoes a phase in their playing career where they try to look for a strategy that beats the house. My advice for you is to get over that phase asap. Unless you're a professional AP (e.g. card counting), or play a game where you're against others (e.g. poker), then don't waste your time on this. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcointalk username: magneto
BTC address (P2SH) starting with the number 3: 357d97jPZKFzEA3BevwK6Nb1ewaXqtaXs6
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
I honestly don't care.
Bitcoin is a unit of account for value in itself - arguably a better one than fiat currencies for that matter.
If you're holding for the long run, it makes absolutely no sense to put an accurate valuation on BTC using fiat. Just think of if the opposite came true - would you necessarily be over the moon if BTC prices went up to millions, but the value of millions of USD had deteriorated so much that was actually worth virtually nothing? Probably not.
|
|
|
|
|
Very interesting stat.
I think that this, as well as the fact that exchange held balances are decreasing, paints a picture of a much more involved BTC investor community who is adopting the technology for the long haul as a store of value.
This poses completely different fundamentals to 2013, 2017, etc. when miners were simply in the game to make short term profits, and speculators stored funds on exchanges to take advantage of short term price fluctuations. Certainly a positive development.
|
|
|
|
|
Nowhere near.
People are still talking about a 6 figure bitcoin on the regular as there is a ton of FOMO left within the market. Also just based on historical trends, it seems much more likely for BTC to see a further rallies going later into 2021 (since most bull markets last 1-2 years, right following the halving year).
But do expect price action to taper off relatively. The size of the pumps we saw over the past few months is simply unsustainable.
|
|
|
|
|
I would say that if you're speculating without basis, without rigorous stop-losses and limits, then you are gambling.
And I've seen plenty of people who suffer from this sort of delusional behaviour. They think that they are making investments into futures and options when in reality, they're throwing themselves into a -EV game that will cost them money in the long run.
Vice versa, if you are making educated bets (through modelling or knowledge) on sports, then that should count as an investment.
|
|
|
|
|
You can pretty much hold any stablecoin pseudoanonymously. It's the cashing out/depositing process that requires verification.
All the actual transactions are conducted on a decentralised blockchain, usually on ETH.
But there is no true "anonymous" coin - you will always be identified by a unique identifier, i.e. your address. But usually it is near impossible to trace the unique identifier back to a person.
|
|
|
|
Powel recenlty made a series of statements around digital currency. Among the declarations: Fed Chair Jerome Powell says central bank-backed digital currencies must coexist alongside cash and other forms of money Powell recently said that a potential digital dollar is a "high priority" project for the US, although that comes with notable technical and policy-related issues Effectively, the issue for government backed digital currencies, which are not anything like a decentralised crypto, is regulations. To elaborate, the world has seen massive changes in the way money moves around. Banks are in general interested in putting some friction and cost to money movements, and a digital currency would probably create an environment to that middleman to disappear or be much less relevant. Governments are mostly concern about what does means to the control they currently have on the flows of information about money, money laundering and taxation. So we should read any comment in that light and translate: "We do not have the regulations in place to allow for a digital dollar". On a side comment, China may use this opportunity to get ahead and has shown some movement towards it. I am not too sure what he means by CBDC's coexisting with cash. The whole point of introducing a CBDC in the first place is to eliminate the need to carry cash. Why in the world would you have a clumsy system whereby banks, cash, and CBDCs all operate alongside each other? This sort of system doesn't quite make sense to me. It is much more likely that the end goal of the CBDC project is to eliminate cash and therefore all possibilities of anonymous transactions. People should not confuse decentralised cryptos with these centralised blockchains. |
|
|
|
We all know when bitcoin on 2017 it pumped like crazy. It went almost $20k and then it falling to $3.3k as lowest price just in few months. What was the reason bitcoin went up to $20,000 back then on 2017? It was only HYPE, there was only a speculation Bitcoin ETF would be accepted, then it declined.
But now? Bitcoin is not HYPE anymore. Even Elon musk, 2nd richest in the world with one of his company, Tesla, accepting Bitcoin as one of payment recently. We also heard many ETFs already got approved and accepted, even few huge banks accepting Bitcoin and they allow their customer invested on them (Morgan Stanley & Fed).
History might be repeat, but surely it's won't be same as 2017 anymore. We won't see bitcoin at $5,000 , $10,000 or even $20,000 anymore from this year to the future
I disagree with the idea that we won't see sub-$40k BTC prices anymore. The same was said about BTC's $5-10k support zone until it absolutely tumbled down in the midst of COVID. Short term, the markets are super irrational and we never know which direction they will possibly head in. That gives rise to the very real possibility that you will see BTC being traded at an extraordinary discount to what it's fundamental valuation is. Institutional investors and ETFs simply won't combat these short term fluctuations. But you're right in one thing - BTC's long term fundamentals have improved exponentially and that is undoubtable. |
|
|
|
|
I think that chances are that this is proprietary.
They seem to be interested in acquiring BTC on an ad hoc basis anyway so I don't see any reason for them to have to go through the trouble of going to a third party payment processor who will convert their BTCs into fiat.
If true, then this is honestly really cool and refreshing to see given the fact that most corporations who start to accept BTC do so through a processor such as Bitpay, which defies the entire purpose of BTC transactions being decentralised.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
