I believe that transaction fees and losing your wallet or getting hacked and not receiving any reimbursement is a serious archilies heel preventing mass adoption for bitcoin.
In many poor countries people use cash as means of payment and no extra fees is levied. If each and every single transaction is levied fees, then people wont spend as much as they spend with cash. I mean if you even transfer from one wallet to another you are leived fees.
The so called lightning network defense is not prudent as in lightning network the sellers ids is being broadcasted to everyone.
bitcoin will only be like gold aka store of value.
Over time Bitcoin fees have come down, as they used to cost a much bigger chunk of every transaction. What you need to do is compare the fees to the existing payment networks and determine how the transaction fees stack up. If you look at things like Visa and Paypal, you are looking at a 3% ish fee and it does seem possible for Bitcoin to get below this at some point if the developers and network continue to make improvements. However I think the real obstacle to adoption, at least via individually controlled wallets, is going to be how long it takes for transactions to be processed. Nobody is going to want to wait around for a long time in a shop as transactions confirm, you can avoid this through an exchange like Coinbase, but then you're just relying on a third party again so might as well stick with existing providers outside of crypto. |
|
|
|
Hi, so I think I have seen an opportunity to operate a sportsbook in a way that is slightly different and probably more user friendly than how the current ones are operating. I’ve been working in the online gambling industry for 10 years now and I know how a lot about betting markets and how the odds work so I’m not worried about that side of things.
There seems to be a lot of scams out there and I’m looking for insight on how to be trustworthy. Not looking to scam anyone or steal, I just want to run a good, well respected sportsbook. I guess people will say to use kyc or licenses but I’d like to hold off on these. In my experience having licensing and kyc does not necessarily mean that you are a good honest sportsbook. Be interesting to hear thoughts on this as it may sound suspicious?
So I’m looking for thoughts on how to gain trust and reputation, because I know I would have doubts depositing money into a brand new sportsbook that’s just appeared out of thin air.
One thing that will increase your chances of looking respectable is proving that you have a sizable bankroll to cover any potential losses, this is especially true with the high roller players. You have to be able to comfortably absorb losses on a very bad day among your many good days, without trying to figure out ways to become more profitable - as you know it's just part of the business. So maybe having a wallet available to view that can show that you're able to fulfill all outstanding bets would be a good start, obviously that might require hot and cold wallet arrangements for security. Frankly, I'm not sure many gamblers do that much research into new sportbooks if potential welcome offers are quite tantalizing. |
|
|
|
This downtrend has been detrimental to my health (mental health). Exactly %70 just now. No lunch money type of money either.
Have we ever experienced this kind of downtrend before?? What's the latest on how long this might last, or if it's even going to recover.
There was similar downtrends when Bitcoin was worth much less, but that was a few years ago. Nobody can say if it's going to recover into the future, but the trend does not look very good right now and it seems to be staircasing downwards. It does seem like there is some correlation between Bitcoin and the wider economic situation right now, people seem to be cashing out of it as the markets are looking jittery with a recession on the horizon due to wild inflation. Unfortunately it is a tough lesson to learn, if you're down 70% then you really must have purchased near the peak, otherwise it doesn't make sense? Hopefully you can take it as a future lesson to diversify and not put all your money into a single asset class. |
|
|
|
Naira notes will be out of circulation soon, says CBN officialIMO I think this is double standard for Nigerian government. What is the major difference between bitcoin and CBDC if not that governments in the world that preach hate for bitcoin only want to have control and monitor the people's transaction through their regulation. If the Nigerian government push people into e-naira while they are stopping "bitcoin trading" and banks connected accounts, they are invariably speaking with both sides of the mouth It's hard to make sense of what is happening with this article, it mentions the e-Naira but doesn't seem to describe how it'll work. To me it looks more like a payment network that is more akin to the Visa/Mastercard networks rather than anything relying on blockchain technology. It sounds like a rather rushed and disorganized plan to force it upon everyone, or is it just a certain group of people like taxi workers who will be required to use it? I feel bad for anyone who struggles with accessing technology, even if Nigeria does have a fairly low age demographic. It's good they're trying to pioneer new tech, but it seems to be poorly executed or maybe the article is just missing a lot of relevant information. |
|
|
|
244,000 metric tons of gold has been discovered to date, 55,000 tons of gold are left.
But there is still a lot of gold left in the universe. There is gold on asteroids for example. One day these will be minable. So the gold supply is not as limited as some may think.
However, gold is hard to move around, weighs a lot, it's hard to sell or buy, it's not practicable.
With BTC it's another story. We all know there are only 21,000,000 coins and 3-4 millions are already lost forever.
There is no Bitcoin in the whole Universe, except on Planet Earth.
BTC is scarcer than gold. I think one day 1 BTC will enter the $xxx,xxx zone then the $x,xxx,xxx HODL BTC
"BTC is scarcer than gold" is an irrelevant statement, while there are only 21 million units in circulation there is potentially the ability to go to infinite decimal places when discussing units of Bitcoin, it's no way to define the value of an asset. It'd also be interesting to see how you came to the conclusion that there are 55,000 tons of gold left because that is at best a wild estimate. Bitcoin certainly does have some advantages over gold - as you say it is much easier to transfer between parties in a secure way. However gold also has advantages over bitcoin, like being a precious metal with industrial usages and some rather useful metal properties, as well as being highly sought after in jewelry manufacturing. |
|
|
|
Dollar-Cost Averaging (DCA) is a classic investment strategy in which you divide up the total amount you'd like to invest in a particular asset across periodic purchases. You don't care if the price goes up or down; you just buy at regular intervals.
Let's say you have $10,000 you'd like to invest in BTC. Instead of making one lump-sum investment, you spread your purchases across a certain period, say 10 months. This means that every month you will buy $1000 worth of BTC regardless of the price.
What does this do?
1. It helps reduce the impact of volatility (because you won't get tempted to invest more than $10,000 when you see dips). In other words, you avoid the risk of making counter-productive decisions out of fear or greed, such as panic-buying or panic-selling.
2. You may not notice it from your short-term investment activity, but if you zoom out and look at the big picture, you'll see that you have more exposure to dips when you dollar-cost average than when you track for a dip.
3. Let's face it, tracking for a dip is time-consuming and stressful. You could use the time you spend poring over news and charts to manage your other income sources.
However, this strategy only works if the price is generally going up. Like any other strategy, it won't work in a bearish market that has no hope of breaking out.
But at least this way:
1. Your total loss will be smaller.
2. You only lose a portion of the fund you initially intended to invest because you didn't add more in the process.
3. Recovering your losses is also easier if the market is bound to recover.
4. The amount you intended to invest is most likely just a portion of your wealth you can afford to lose, which means you can also afford to wait it out until the market recovers (and not resort to capitulation).
This could have saved or eased the suffering of those who lost their entire life savings on assets that crashed in the recent bear.
DCA is generally discussed about the stock market and is often the only strategy available to people - adding a set amount every month as they get paid their salary. It helps capture the troughs of the market and also the peaks, which ends up with the best average returns you're likely to get. However it does not really apply to Bitcoin, which is an idle and non-productive asset class. Sure you might have made money from DCA on the way up, but at its current hefty price that could go up or down, you're unlikely to make anything like the fairly stable returns of the stock market. If you're trying to "recover losses" then you're already in a failing position and many people simply don't have the long term commitment that real investing requires. |
|
|
|
Plan to solve Create usd or other stablecoin like eur or why not gbp... And make big airdrop. So everybody will get nice ammount  And exchangers will pay apy like 40-50% to hold Its instant plan to remove poverty you print money A new currency doesn't solve any problems at all. Currency is just a mechanism of storing value and exchanging it between two people. You seem to put a lot of content out into the forums but have a very weak grasp of how economics actually works in practice. People end up in poverty for all sorts of reasons, but arguably the best way to solve it is providing education and having a stable form of governance within the country. That requires all sorts of factors like an independent judiciary, strong institutions that do not bend to political pressure, a solid legal framework and all these things can take many decades, if not centuries, to formulate. Printing money usually only helps consolidate more of it with the very richest, who have the maximum ability to take advantage in times of plenty versus the poorest who need to spend to survive. |
|
|
|
It's wishful thinking. People have seen the meteoric rise of Bitcoin in the last 13 years and are always hoping that they can make the same amount. However these sort of "investors" are way too late to the party and the same with El Salvador. It was a convenient and catchy tool that the young new president used as a way of offering hope to his people. Grand illusions can go on for a long time before crashing down, Bitcoin has many purposes but becoming a national currency is not necessarily one of them. As we see now, it's sinking back down and nobody can predict the future, but right now they've paid a lot more for their original buys than it is currently worth - if every citizen had held on to the currency their national bank purchased for distribution. |
|
|
|
Argentina is about to launch bitcoin education in their curriculum, this is going to take place in 40 High schools with about 4,000 students. This is an Interesting news many bitcoiners have been waiting for, I think this won't just end in Argentina, other countries will take this same good within a short time. Argentina is the second highest bitcoin adopter in Latin America, I the reason for the innovation is to make students know the importance of bitcoin. The economy of Argentina is suffering in the hands of hyperinflation. https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/bitcoin-education-launches-in-argentina-for-high-schoolsIt's interesting to see this sort of education taking place, but I think the people of Argentina have many other problems that need resolving before stepping to this conclusion. They should really be teaching about the wider blockchain technology in general as that is the underlying and useful architecture to the whole system - a transparent decentralized ledger. I'm not sure how much depth they'll really be going into with this project and it might just be a cursory overview, as there are many financial instruments out there which do not get nearly enough coverage in early education and could be just as useful to learn about as Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
I think that what happened in the Master of Augusta (2019) excited us all to believe a possible return... an accident "again" changed everything, age and old injuries are taking their toll on one of the greatest athletes of all time, you may not know anything about Golf but you surely know who Tiger Woods is. The news this time isn't his big chance to win but that for the first time he's up against the odds, even the worst for a first-time Major winner. Tiger Woods’ 2022 PGA Championship Betting Odds are Career-Long for a Major Source: https://www.actionnetwork.com/golf/tiger-woods-betting-odds-pga-championship-major-eventThere is a possible return of what is considered the most dominant player in the history of golf and even of any sport in its comparison, at the level of stars like Michael Jordan. I think a withdrawal is seen in the short term at least in the PGA. WyT?
Maybe he will pull off a miracle, but people have a habit of holding on to things for far too long. He was an exceptional player in his peak years and should always be admired for that, however he has had some troubles in his personal life since that time and arguably fallen below his prime. He will be a very strong player versus any average golfer but there are a steady stream of top quality golfers coming through the pipeline each year who will be looking to leave their own mark on history, following in the footsteps of this legend. If you are a gambler, then it feels like there are many other better potential candidates who would deserve a bet before defaulting to him. |
|
|
|
Cooperative investing between small investors is better then investing on your own
Let's say you have:
10 usd can you invest it in something to generate real profit ? No
10000 usd can you invest it in something to generate real profit ? Depends on the margin of the business ,if you get 5% per year it's less then inflation so you lose money,if you get 20% per year good margin better then inflation
Now let's say i notice there is a demand for fertilizers ,and most people notice that also ... but i got only 500 usd to invest, another guy has 1500 usd ,another guy 10000 usd and so on ...
How can we pool the money together to build a fertilizers plant ,if x is in country a ,y in country b and so on and best place for investment is in country c do to fact country c has gas ?
Is there a website / app that allows investors to pool money like that ? ( no stock market / to create new businesses i mean )
This is nonsense really, but I guess it can depend on what country your in and the availability of investing tools / brokers in your country. You jump from having $10 to invest in one scenario, which apparently is nothing, to having $500 in the next scenario which means you have a sizable amount to start investing? What sort of weird logic you've used. Nobody should expect 20% per year returns when the stock market average is around 8%, the only way you'll get such high returns is through years of practice and learning how to pick investments by yourself, rather than relying on any kind of pooled money which is open to all sorts of additional risks. One thing that you do need to learn is consistency and sensible reasoning skills. |
|
|
|
Here is the article: https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/courtandcrime/arid-40875731.html Apparently Boyle Sports manipulated a man is a very sad way where he ended up loosing all the money he scammed from a family member. The man had probelms with Gambling and he tried to stop by closing the account on the website and at the end of the day they saw him stopping but kept sending him mails and at the same time, they apparently sent him a 50$ free betting which at the end ending up to be awful for him since he started it again and ended up loosing all the fortune. The whole things is extremely complex like Some Sherlock Holmes story. The person was not infact gullible since to fuel his gambling addiction he scammed his family member and then went to court and pleaded guilty as well blamed it all on the Boyle Sports. What do you think who was in the wrong ? I think both the bettor and the Boyle Sports were in the wrong. It was established that the two accounts, to which the payments totalling €56,000 were made, were a personal bank account and a Boyle Sports account, both in Thomas O’Connell’s name. The payments varied from €100 to €1000 and averaged at just over €200.
“Contact was almost on a daily basis – sometimes a couple of times on a particular day. He admitted that he took €56,000 and impersonated (the solicitor),” Det. Garda Fuller said. O’Connell was actually a client of the solicitor he impersonated. The defendant had a gambling and alcohol addiction.
The phone calls and texts – supposedly from the solicitor - to the victim were a work of fiction by 48-year-old Thomas O’Connell who did not stop until he got his hands on every euro of the €56,000 the victim had inherited. I've had some interaction and experience with Boyle Sports in the past, they do have adequate safety measures in place to stop someone from casually returning if they have requested self exclusion for a period of time. They will have had to make some declarations and go through certain steps to remove that self exclusion if it ever was in place - I get the feeling it was never even attempted by this hopeless addict. In most situations I am supportive of people who lose their own money if the gambling controls are not strong enough, maybe they do need a review at this site, but this person has gone a step further and stolen from his own family - that is possibly some of the worst behavior possible, which makes the sympathy levels pretty low. |
|
|
|
I have found this somewhat interesting news for our North American friends which states that a California state regulator could be studying the possibility of annulling the ban on donations of cryptocurrencies to political campaigns that has been in force since 2018. Communications director for the California Fair Political Practices Commission Jay Wierenga says: "This has been on our radar since the end of last year" According to its May 2022 agenda, the California Fair Political Practices Commission, or FPPC, has scheduled a "pre-debate" on Thursday about the use of cryptocurrency for political campaign contributions in the state. Upon further investigation, I have seen that Aarika Rhodes, an elementary school teacher running to represent California's 32nd congressional district, currently held by Democrat Brad Sherman, has openly asked her supporters to donate Bitcoin via the Lighting Network. : "Our campaign has officially adopted Lighting for contributions. This revolutionary technology creates accessibility and looks to the future. I am delighted to offer this option to our fans in all 50 states." This was mentioned through her Twitter. Twitter: https://twitter.com/AarikaRhodes/status/1465712231216136208?ref_src=twsrc%5EtfwUnfortunately I found the news in Spanish, but nothing that our beloved translator can do. Source (Spanish): https://es.cointelegraph.com/news/california-regulator-will-revisit-long-running-ban-on-crypto-donations-on-may-19At first I was shocked that donations, which I typically associate with charity related purposes, would be the target of any new regulation when there are so many other things that could be addressed first. Now I see it will purely be targeting political related donations which is definitely a good thing. All political donations should be banned quite frankly because they have been heavily abused in recent years and they are the scourge of a truly democratic society. They have been consistently abused since the law banning companies from making political donations was repealed and they are used by nefarious forces to get strategic politicians in who will favor ingrained business interests over the greater good of the public. |
|
|
|
Do you prefer Themed provably fair casinos or not. By themed I mean like Tower bet or bitkong style. What are some of the best themed platforms? Any new ones?
It's frankly crazy that someone would find a "theme" to be a worthwhile factor in your decision to use a particular casino or not. If that is the extent of your decision making, you better be ready to lose every penny that you put into whichever site you lose. That's fine and I guess there are a small group of people who use such sites purely to relieve some kind of boredom, but it really is a waste of money to be entertained by some flashy graphics and peculiar sounds which are created to reinforce habit building behavior. It is a dangerous path to choose and very few people can afford to be that complacent with money. You'd be much better off analyzing the odds to determine how long your money will last. |
|
|
|
Two small things first before I start making my arguments about this: - I put the title "pay to play" instead of the "pay to work" I will refer further down not to make it confusing for readers - I'm a bitcoin maximalist so I'm obviously biased against tokens and altcoins, deal with it!  The model: First I must point out that games that have described themselves as "play to earn" have existed long before the blockchain, it was either by viewing ads through the game or selling resources in-game or on an afar larger scale and for deals outside the game simply farming the shit out of gold or items and selling those to other players. So the idea is not new at all, the only thing special about it is some buzzwords like NFT and Blockchain, as for the games, are still some lame ass copies of more famous games with no actual revolutioanry technology behind them. The free to pay entry This is the main problem with all these games since they have to attract users by rewarding them and then need also an entry point, it's all you can eat but with an entry fee so that not only some might lose money on it but you also keep some desperate people motivated to click endlessly each day to recover the loses. So, at this point, it's not as much play to earn but work your ass to not be in red. The work part The game I will mention a few times axie infinity considers itself some pokemon clone, of course with nothing other than having some characters fight. Actually quite funny, pokemon go creatures don't breed in the game at all. So while comparing itself to famous games it lacks one thing, innovation, and it has tons of another, called repetition. And this is where the two models completely cut ties, while gamers on the pokemon side play when they want how much they want, walking eggs to hatch for miles if they have the lungs and legs for it, in play to work models you're restricted, because, well, it would mean too much money printed. And this is where you completely cut the link between a fun game that has millions of users coming out of their houses in the rain to fight gyms or 5-star raids with millions desperate to sell their tokens as high as possible. The failing revenue model And this is the part that is most interesting. Somehow users new to the cryptocurrency scene think that everything that has currency and decentralization and other bling words will gain value out of thin air and stay like that forever. Probably the 100 to 0 Luna fail might have taught some a lesson but I doubt the majority will indeed understand. Not exactly sure how this abstract topic ended up in the economics section, but I guess it's somewhat relevant. You are right that free to play games are likely the future just because of the sheer amount of competition out there between game developers. However it would certainly make it more difficult for new game developers to enter the scene as this model was what launched most big game developers in the past. With the advent of loot boxes and paid skins it is possible to fund a game now without requiring upfront payment from the players, there are completely free to play games like World Of Tanks which are raking in many millions per year and are a prime example of a successful operating model. |
|
|
|
I see a lot of great Casinos and Sports Betting platforms here that doesn't really have great brand name but have excellent functionalities and quality designs. While some ( not so many) do have both great designs, functionality and perfect brand name, so many majority simply don't. So, I was wondering. If I'm going to spend so much money to build a great gambling platform, why not just spend extra little more to acquire a great name? After all, nothing is greater in business than your brand equity.
What do you think? I'd like to understand the mindset of some gambling operators and start ups. What do you consider to be the most important in your gambling startup? Great name or site functionality or both?
It must have both. Without a reputable name, the casino can't be trusted, and without the good functionality of the website/application, it can't provide players with an enjoyable experience which will eventually lead to the loss of players. Brand recognition can be a powerful thing - choosing a clean, concise and relevant company name can certainly help your company grow quicker than having to buy in ever customer. Being able to easily pronounce the name is key if you want it to spread via word of mouth. Even the domain extension can play a part, more people will naturally know the .com domain extension as it has been around such a long time, however they may mistrust an obscure extension that they've never seen before. That being said, having all the basic functionality you see across every casino now is going to be essential, so you really need a good balance between these two factors. |
|
|
|
For those unaware, "hyperbitcoinization" means the adoption of Bitcoin at a large scale worldwide making it the standard (global) unit of account. In a "hyperbitcoinized" world, you would pay for anything using Bitcoin instead of Fiat. In the past years, Bitcoin's mainstream adoption went up at an accelerated rate. Bitcoin's ever-rising popularity made El Salvador the first country to adopt it as legal tender. As inflation increases at alarming levels, people will seek out for a solution to the problem. And what better way than ditching Fiat in favor of Bitcoin? What are your thoughts? Do you think we're close to "hyperbitcoinization"? If not, why? What will be of the world without centralized Fiat currencies? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Frankly, I don't see it ever happening. Someday, some cryptocurrency might fill that role if it is efficient enough to take on existing payment/banking networks, but Bitcoin at 21 million units (no matter how many decimal places) simply does not have the capacity. There are also transaction processing bottlenecks which are extremely limiting and the transaction fees are also excessive in comparison to existing payment providers. Bitcoin is very useful, has proven the decentralized currency model is possible, but never assume that the first generation of something will succeed forever - just look how phones have progressed from the first rotary version, to big bricks, to mini "dumb" phones to ultra high definition smart phones. |
|
|
|
when it comes to casinos and certain types of "investments", I pay close attention to depositing any amount.
It's better avoid any risk at all if it possible. Too many scams in the past also from "reputable" sources.
This is why I like this forum because here you can find an excellent list of information and expert users in discovering scams or simply giving valid advice .
Should be strictly avoided, the casino type of investment will not guarantee full profits. Better to play right away than invest in a casino, I've tried that in the past, investing in a casino doesn't give me any profit, for example today I get 1% profit tomorrow I lose 1%. It just spins in place, at worst ever my money no left at all. I seem to have seen several threads on this forum about investing in casinos. As far as I remember, despite the volatility, in the end, the investments turned out to be profitable. Which is quite logical - at a distance the casino always wins. And I think this is a smart investment. Where else can you get a good percentage of profits on bitcoin - a deflationary asset? Everywhere there is a risk, but if you have chosen a project with an impeccable reputation, then this is a good decision. Majority of gambling sites now doesnt really accept any investments but there are some which are still accepting like https://www.bustabit.com/bankroll/change-bankrollWhich no doubt that it do really make profits in long term but dont expect for it to be big but not really that a bad idea. For totally new casinos that do ask out for funding to build the site then this is where doubts and hesitance do starts. It's interesting to see this idea and it could help some casinos get off the ground by allowing them to accept higher limit player, but obviously you're helping the casino grow by providing a zero risk bankroll to the company. You could earn a return but chances are once these casinos have high and sustainable profits they will start to cut off this sort of funding because they can finance the operation themselves and take all the profits. You'll always be relying on their security to protect your investment as well and these type of companies are a massive target for hackers, only the big players in the game who have been around for a while will already be prepared for the many possible attacks that can happen, newer sites can easily get wiped out by just one. |
|
|
|
The global food situation is worsening every second and in a month or two could lead to mass unrest followed by regimes suppressing the violence and eventually a wider war between countries stealing each other's food supplies to ease their domestic unrest, something similar but worse than what we saw during the first months of pandemic where Europeans countries were stealing from each other to ease their own crisis.
It seems that you have a favorable bias towards Russia underlying your whole post, yet Russia is the one that started this global food crisis because of the totally unnecessary war with Ukraine - it began the biggest war that Europe has seen since WW2 simply because the free Ukrainian people were fed up of being controlled by one of Putin's useless puppets. Unfortunately it is all the poorest in the world who will be worst effected by this and the richest countries of the world will likely suffer the least. It seems that even India is restricting their exports and this sort of trade protectionism is bad for the world. The sooner the war in Ukraine stops, the sooner we can get back to normal peace and cheaper food. |
|
|
|
To what extent is the online slot game machine RTP reliable based on it's technology?
As words in the street has it that it has gained so much popularity than other casino games due to it's simplicity nature.
Let's discuss, what's your view.
Let's be honest, when it comes to money people are bound to pay much more attention than anything else. It is similar to asking about the security of online banking, for sure you should question everything, but there is huge resources put into setting up, maintaining and future proofing such technology when it can cause the banks mega money if things go wrong. Casinos and sportbooks are no exception to this rule, they will often stick with tried and tested systems (many are simply white label clones) because they stand to lose a lot of money due to any failures. They also want customers to be safe because it's only constantly new deposits that draw in so much profit for them and they have to give at least occasional fair wins if they want lots of return custom. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
