I am trying to unterstand what you just said in terms of the proof of websites running in real-time or using provably fair software. Now for sport bets etc. an app is as good as a website as the outcome can be verified by checking the relevant sources, but when I run a slot game or some weird fishing game, I am not always able to verify whether everything is fair, can I? How do I even know on a website when I play a poker game that everything is fair? I could still be scammed by the website running five bots on a six player table. When you take the average gambling website and play slot games, is there a realistic possibility for players to verify whether or not the outcomes have not been manipulated? They might have a certificate or something, but even then you can't really know I would imagine.

I don't know if this is the optimal strategy to go about price expectations in general Rather not. As was pointed out, expectations are important and can move mountains, but there are several parameters that are vitally important to Bitcoin prices and many of those parameters are impossible to anticipate or even assess the relevance and a respective price tag for. Nobody knows what sort of unexpected events could happen. I am sure we now know that bad incidents can happen which impact the global economy as a whole. If you only take the halving and crunch some numbers, the impact should not be as severe anymore as it used to be, but as many reasons as there are that could get Bitcoin go up a lot, I guess as many are there that could get Bitcoin into (temporary) trouble in terms of its price. It is the typical list maybe starting with regulation, and then all the other garbage we have going on in the world right now.

Usually Dortmund should win the game against Wolfsburg, but it is never easy to play the game the next day after the strongest rivals won their games already. You can only lose and that could be a problem for Dortmund. Psychologically, this weekend has already been an advantage for Dortmund and they can now only maintain the situation they had before the weekend even started. I still hope they will be doing their job properly and keep it tight. For Wolfsburg the win would mean a lot as well and that is why I think the game could be very intense.

It is only a matter of time in most cases. Bank roll management does play an important part in gaming strategies, but most games are set up such that the odds area against you long-term anyway. When you play the lottery and win a jackpot of perhaps $100 million and a ticket cost you $2 and the chances to win the jackpot is like 1 in 200,000,000, you can play 50.000.000 times, lose the 100.000.000 and would still be way below an expected value that would put you into the green zone.

I know that I didn't take into account the smaller winnings, which would come on top. But usually the jackpot is exorbitantly higher in value that you get the point. That is the problem. Poker players can win a tournament, or they can win several tournaments, but even those with big names in the industry sometimes go broke. Because what do you do if on the one hand the odds should now be in your favor, but your losing streak is longer than what your expected value calculations suggested? You go broke or you cut losses and stop. Even if it is a game with a slightly positive expected value wouldn't even mean that you always end up with profits.

Well I have now seen the summary and you could tell from the smile on Klopp's face that there was a lot at stake in this game even if they won't make it into the Champions League eventually. These types of games can do a lot for the relationship between the players, manager and the fans and the total mood in the club. If they tied this game everyone would be down and questioning everything that is currently going on in Liverpool, but if you turn it around again in the very last moment of the game, those moments are positively electrifying as well. I think this was one of those games that might have contributed to Klopp actually deciding to stay in Liverpool. I don't know what would happen if they kept losing now.

The less influence you have on an outcome by using cognitive effort, the more it is gambling. In roulette you can put in as much effort as you want to understand the mechanics behind it, your personal contribution to anticipating an outcome doesn't change. The same counts for Bitcoin when you just jump into it without familiarizing yourself with it but only follow some google search trends and a graph that goes through the roof on Coinmarketcap. You are probably still better off as the herd behavior could be a good indicator of what's happening, but for you individually it would still be considered gambling.

If you put effort into understanding the technology and its consequences, you could at least for yourself reduce the element of gambling about that investment. I wouldn't eliminate the term altogether as there is always a bit of gambling involved when you invest money, that even counts for treasury bills as even governments could fail to repay their debt. But it is a difference when you know what kind of problems a certain technology tackles and why people bought into it in the first place. There are certainly a lot of gamblers who got into Bitcoin, but there are also a lot of people who did tons and tons of research into understanding it and they made a well-considered decisions based on calculated odds that justify an investment from their personal point of view.

But what is the point for Real Madrid of closing the gap to Barcelona in the situation they are in? Does it matter whether in the end it is either 11 points for Barcelona or 8 points? Everyone with a realistic sense knows that the season is over when it comes to the La Liga Championship. The only rank that Real Madrid should try to defend is the second rank as that must be their least requirement for a season finish. You can be behind Barcelona for a year, that can happen. But making it to 3rd only is a bad achievement. If they win a title or two in the two other competitions and they finish 2nd in La Liga, it was still a good year in my opinion even if their performance in La Liga was obviously behind their own expectations.

This game between Liverpool and Tottenham turned into a Hollywood blockbuster in the final minutes. Klopp saw his team give away so many points literally for free this season and if they tied this game after a 3-0 lead, he would have probably suffered from a heart attack. Jota taking back the lead right after Tottenham scored the equalizer also was quite lucky. I haven't seen the highlights yet, but all I want to see is Klopp's face when Richarlison scored the 3-3 Tottenham is in trouble now. Brighton even has three more games to play. The possibility that Tottenham is making the cut for the Europa League is nonexistent anymore. On paper they still have a chance, but they are running out of games.

I have to say I was hoping for Hertha to keep a clean sheet for a little bit longer. I could feel how the hearts of Bayern's management was beating faster and faster!

They also had 18 corners and couldn't turn their chances into goals. I think the game would have gotten out of emotional control if still had been a clean sheet for Hertha until late in the 80s minutes or so.

As a bottom line it was to be expected that they don't let this chance go that was given to them by Borussia Dortmund. But once more Bayern had trouble to find the final solution against a very weak opponent.

There we go: the final match ball has finally arrived for Napoli after Inter turned the game around against Lazio. Inter deserved the win a lot more than Lazio today and even though Lazio is the strongest defense in Serie A, I can't even tell how many more goals Inter could have scored today. They have struggled to make use of their opportunities, but become very strong towards the end. Lazio was surprisingly passive and didn't really try a lot to go for a come back once they were down.

But this is going to a tough competition for the the qualifier rankings. There are now essentially six teams with realistic chances to make it into the Champions or Europa League. Inter will be playing against Roma and Atalanta. A lot of exciting games to come in Serie A.

As much as I think that some of the predictions that were made by the Simpsons have been quite interesting, as much it is quite safe to say that the more predictions you make, the higher probability that some of them are right. Nobody would really list the things that haven't become true, but when you read a list in an aggregated way only about the things that came true, the idea you develop about their ability to predict events becomes quite skewed.

This list for example also shows that some of the interpretations are quite far-fetched. When there happens a flu in an episode in 1993 and people then say that this was a predictor for the Covid 19 pandemic, I don't know whether that makes a whole lot of sense.

The Trump presidency, which was brought up in a 2000 Simpsons episode, has been a topic for 15 or even 20 years by then as Trump himself brought it up. I'd say that many of the episodes are also already inspired by content that later turned into reality. Trump has always been a very present public figure and has been asked on major talkshows whether he would consider a presidency ever since the 1980s. It is not always as magical as it seems to be what the Simpsons said.

Why then do you say that it is likely for Bitcoin to drop below $20k when you also say that chances are slim? You mean it is unlikely but not impossible to drop below $20k.

When you say that the worst is over, as much as I would like that to be true, as much do I have to say that nobody really knows at this point in time. The Chinese could still escalate and that would not only result in a military war, but also in an unprecedented economic war. We already have an unprecedented global situation and that would make it even worse. Probably much worse.

But when it comes to investing in Bitcoin, waiting too long can be as harmful as going to fast. I think adding Bitcoin to your portfolio never is a wrong decision if you leave yourself some scope for action depending on how the world develops. I think it is difficult to tell how people would treat Bitcoin as an asset class when the world were to enter in an even worse situation. Is it an asset they use to escape from other systems, or is it the first they would liquidate in order to have cash to pay for all the necessary items and services?

Not owning an entire Bitcoin is the statistical reality for the vast majority of crypto owners It is not possible given that there are only 21 million and a lot of those Bitcoin is held by single hands already. The ownership isn't as centralized anymore as it was claimed to be, but as Bitcoin gets more and more adopted globally I think the unit of account that will be more relevant is probably going to be mBTC instead of BTC. For as long as you can still get your hands on an entire BTC, go for it!

You name it here. These questions are usually all about individual circumstances. Most guys who open such a thread here bring up some number like 80% without any further details. How should someone come up with some reasonable advice?

80% always sounds like too much, but imagine if you are a 20 years old guy with a good source of income and no major financial obligations. If someone decides to take a risk with 80% of savings, it could still be ok for as long as you know that you can pay for everything that's going to come your way for the foreseeable future.

The younger you are and the less obligations you have, the more you can go the maximum. It totally depends on countless of other factors that nobody here knows anything about.

I am all for technology as well. Although I would say that line judges had not been a problem for a while now anyway due to the usage of the hawk eye in critical decisions. It was quite rare that a mistake was not only made, but also not corrected. It did happen when a player waived a potential challenge, but we have been very close to perfection already. But I think that the game will benefit from full technology sideline judges. There won't be any waiting anymore and to be fair it is also unrealistic to expect from a line judge to always be on point at that speed and precision.

Now I did like the challenge moment when the screen showed up. It was all about excitement and I wonder whether they are still going to display close balls on a screen or whether there will just be a sound and that's it.

You can't use it as a guarantee of course, but I am convinced that this will be a big warning to Juventus. I think what was unexpected for most people was that Sevilla wasn't even a lucky winner in the second leg, but they were the much better team on that day. No need to recapitulate the first leg, which was a lucky ending for Sevilla beyond doubt with two own goals in the last couple of minutes, but the second game they dominated Manchester United and I believe that was a wake up call for the other teams as well. Only because Sevilla had trouble in La Liga, doesn't mean they can't compete with anyone in that competition. They obviously can.

Well said, but I think that even though Arsenal was leading the table, Manchester City has been the better team throughout. When it comes down to this one single situation, everyone would bet on Manchester City. This year is their year and I wouldn't be surprised at all if they take home all three titles. Of course they can lose a game, but bottom line is that they are the strongest soccer team right now.

That is the one thing that OP got wrong and the other thing is that in many cases a single law really isn't the problem. If there is a law requiring companies to report transactions or balances exceeding 50,000 Euro, but there is no law that requires people to go through centralized services for transactions in order to legally prove their funds' origin later on, Bitcoin is still good to go for as long as people understand that it is important for the p2p economy to thrive. When the bundle of laws enfold mutual effects such that transactions facilitated by centralized services must be reported and using a centralized service is the only legal way to prove the origin of your crypto funds, it's starting to look worse for the industry. In Europe they initially planned a whole web of laws that would severely undermine privacy and the practicability of cryptocurrency usage, but it seems that they have revised their point of view from what I can tell for now.

You could theoretically describe the Martingale strategy as an abstract time function for an event to occur on average within a time series.

Usually when you play a dice game you would count the number of rolls that it takes until you should fail on average. But the number of rolls are sometimes not as comprehensible as time is. When you play an automated dice game and you have like three rolls per second, that would give you 180 rolls a minute and 10,800 rolls an hour. So how long would it take if you play a coin flip game for head to occur 10 times in a row?

0.5^10 = 0,000976563 > this is about 1/10,000th, which is roughly equal to 10,800. In this game you could let it run for about an hour on average until you get a streak of the same symbol showing up 10 times in a row.

This is interesting because many people think that if they only choose their bankroll high enough, it should be impossible to face a situation where, let's say head comes up 20 times in a row. But it is just a question of time. If you only let it run long enough, at some point a streak of 20 X in a row will happen. The variance can still be huge and it might take much shorter or longer than the average, but eventually it will happen.

In my opinion time gives someone a better impression than the number of rolls.

You actually provided what is mathematically set in stone already. There are more average persons in the world than there are Bitcoin! Which means that not every average person will ever be able to hold an entire Bitcoin. Psychologically I think this is an important aspect to consider when you are getting into Bitcoin. Avoid FOMO because you set some idealistic investment goal like "I need 1.0 Bitcoin no matter what and as quickly as possible". If your cash flow only allows for slow and steady, then stick with slow and steady and just by sticking to that you are probably better off than the average person in the long run.

Being an average person in terms of income does not necessarily equate to being an average investor as well. Sticking to principles, continuously revising your investment strategy if necessary and persistently sticking to what you set up as your strategy can get you further than some of the higher income persons.

Also as you said it depends on where you are in the world. This thread by LoyceV is labeled "What can 1 Bitcoin buy in your country?" and the result to that question can be very different. Now the thread doesn't adjust for time differences in Bitcoin's price I think, but still 0.25 Bitcoin can get you very far in one country and not so far in another. But owning 0.25 Bitcoin is aways better than owning none, and a lot of people in the world own none (yet).