I 100% agree since I'm one of those people. Well if I do win big I tend to withdraw, but for small wins, I just use them again to gamble later on, so I almost lose everything I deposit, but it's not exactly the case for everyone. That's why I reckon the "100%" profit brought the idea that you have some sort of malware or script hence the accusations (which I don't blame them for), not to mention the, well, attitude.
Doesn't really clear up much since it's just your words. Though I guess anyone that is curious can pm you and ask about some past services you've given, if any, or a sample of a published site.

Ya'll get a room, advertising a service in a different thread, and then asking about it kind of seems rude.

Can't really say if it has had one, technically speaking it should, but across the market crashes we've had before, we haven't really seen any casinos flunk from their services to their customers just because of that from what I know.

The industry itself won't lose it (otherwise a lot of industries would've lost a lot with how scammers work) but said casinos involved would naturally lose all reputation.

No, not really, I tend to spend everything whenever I gamble if possible. If not then I just leave it there for my next session, I never leave anything big in it anyway. If it ever happens that I do, well I don't, I withdraw it instead.

As I've said in the thread OP linked, I'm down for casinos being public about their reserves IF they want to and if they aren't breaking any laws, NDAs, contracts, or whatever that they set up in their business. Since we haven't really had an issue with casinos I don't really see a reason why it should be forced though, especially if we consider how as I've said earlier, crashes have happened a lot of times across multiple coins that casinos use and they haven't really had any issues.

It was overhyped. It was an idea worth exploring but it definitely wasn't something that was going to be developed without decades of development imo, not to mention most of what we have right now are knockoffs (imo) of say VRchat, Minecraft, etc.

Honestly, my first time hearing about the project. Went to check their Twitter and it seems like they're still doing some stuff for its development, but it doesn't look like they're doing or have done anything "big" that would make investing in it worth it.

Hmm seeing as it's down really bad right now, I'd suggest not buying in any for now and just hold what you have, it might recover a bit and by then it's up to you to decide whether to cut your losses then and there or hope for more. At this point, you're already down pretty badly anyway so I doubt losing more would be much of an issue (since you've already lost anw).

It "seems" to be effective doesn't equate to something wrong never happening imo. It does seem that the idea would work wonders if casinos were to agree. I don't think they have some problems with handling crypto though but if in case there's enough traction that customers would request it I don't think it'd be a problem, as long as it doesn't conflict with the licenses and whatnot that they signed before the business ran.

In the end, it's a matter of what if, and since casinos don't really have a track record of anything big happening when the market crashes(afaik) we don't really have anything to base it on. I am in favor of it though if they want or are pressured by users to do so, even in the case they have some sort of plan or method to avoid damages caused by crashes).

I'd still say most (if not all) streamers who gamble are actually paid for their losses (or have a set amount casinos give them to play with). The reason they can make it even with that is their ability to create a stunt or reaction that would still relate to the users, regardless if it was their money or not, and that's their craft, does leave a bad taste though since some people think they can hit it big like them with no risks involved. Though I'd say most of their following actually just stem from people trying to win their giveaways.

As for him not streaming anymore, I reckon any sort of streamer similar to him wouldn't be able to with Twitch's guidelines. Nor is it allowed in Youtube, which are two of the biggest platforms so I reckon they're still looking for alternatives right now.

I wouldn't say that I'm at the "addicted" level, I just simply enjoy the experience. Honestly anyway you enjoy gambling is fine as long as it doesn't negatively affect your mentality and your finances in life imo. If those aspects were affected then I'd consider one to be pretty addicted to it. E.g. if a rich person were just to gamble away every day I wouldn't necessarily think it was addiction, I'd only consider it if it was actually harming you but if you have the capability to enjoy it to that level then I say feel free to do so.

I mostly do sports nowadays though so it's less of a gamble and more of a thinking game for me though.

I wouldn't use "hard" as a description for gambling really, more like unknown, neither easy nor hard since you can't exactly figure out whether you're going to win or not in a gamble. Ofc it tends to fall more toward the losing side since the house always wins, but you get my point I think. Unfortunately since it's "unknown", it ends up looking more attractive to most people as well hence why they're going for it.

It mostly boils down to only seeing one perspective of their lives instead of its entirety (especially since we can't exactly see the other sides) imo. They're probably struggling, but it may be only visible in the later term since they have say, savings, or are just asking loans and stuff like that.

Is setting a goal of $10k a week for your so-called "motivation"? Or is it really just that you live in a place where it needs $10k to live weekly cause I'd bail tf out if it really was. I understand the idea of using big to create something bigger, but that's pretty subjective in terms of where you are in life. Say $1k may be big in the eyes of an average joe, but it can be peanuts for billionaires out there. Not saying that it's wrong, but rather the fact that you limit yourself to that one move only is.

The idea's there, but there are also other ideas that could prove to be safer, after all, this is something like an all-in type of bet. It's really just up to your style imo, but it is for a fact that your style OP isn't the only style there is.

Long-term investors are called long-term because waves like these usually won't affect them. Especially if the cause was rather clear in cases like this (The FTX issue), and wouldn't really affect the market in the long term that they're looking at. Some long-term hodlers probably even held way back when Bitcoin was in 3, or 4 digits, so even with the current price they'd probably still profit.

As for the price by the end, I reckon we'd still be hovering below $30k. There may still be issues that crop up that could potentially push the price down temporarily like right now, positive news are also unlikely even to push it that big, so we're off to a steady movement for the rest of the year imo.

Should've included card counting in it OP since it's one of the terms closely associated with Blackjack (even though it's close to impossible to use it nowadays). Was rather interested in it back then, especially because of card counting but quickly lost interest in it due to knowing it wasn't possible anymore. I did play my fair share though.

It's not really a "mathematical" brain. You just have to have a pretty good mind for memorization, and yes it's possible, but that was in the past. Casinos have implemented simple counters to it such as using multiple decks and automatic shuffling. It was possible back in the day but if you were caught pretty sure casinos can cancel your winnings or even sue you.

Wouldn't it be better to act as an investor for some sort of exchange company instead of building one from the ground up? It's going to take an enormous amount of effort and funds for you to build one up, not to mention a lot of years would probably pass while going for development. Especially considering how you yourself said "you don't know how", just learning about the stuff that goes on might take you a lot of money and time already, not to mention building the exchange/s itself. There's also the legal stuff involved for the licensing of the exchange itself which may vary from country to country afaik.

Most cheats that are used in online casinos come from bugs or loopholes that are taken advantage of, whether it is to illegally win or access the internal code of the game and then make you win. Casinos are usually unable to treat those, especially for new types of games, but with most games being a copypasta of other similar types, mostly being reskins of just the same game, you'd rarely find those types of things, let alone take advantage of it.

Not to mention that cheating never really popped into my head. Sure I was frustrated as hell and wanted to win, but cheating? I might as well have used my effort into something more useful than trying into something that might not be fruitful and even get me in a legal case.

If they were going to put NFTs like how other casinos, e.g. Rollbit have done it, then it should be perfectly fine imo. It's actually just like VIP benefits after all so they only need to play around with that and let the customers themselves create the economy around it but also limit the amount they could buy/sell. Most other NFTs were absolutely useless hence why people don't really like them imo, most of which were only built around hype.

Sadly that 1% could bring about damages that could ruin the casino, both in its finance and in its reputation. Imo as long as the casino doesn't necessarily request for KYC immediately, and only upon suspicious activity instead, that'd be a great deal already imo. Ofc if it's completely possible to have it then that's better, but if not, I'd rather choose the lesser devil instead.

They failed at limiting users to one account (there are bypasses around the system they made so..), and they failed at controlling the economy so that even if millions of players came in, prices would remain relatively stable in the long run (even if sudden dips happen). The most the market would've been involved with was when changes happened to the in-game mechanics such as skills, lands, etc. It was healthy at its initial release imo, but with the sudden influx of a lot of players, everything just went to ruin after that initial hype.

It is rather hard imo to manage the economy of the game so that it can last to a stable run though. It's understandable in a sense as to why Axie failed in doing so.

If you want to be safe individually, then avoiding or minimizing the usage of centralized platforms would be the best action to take. That way any immediate damage from these platforms wouldn't necessarily affect you, though it will inevitably damage the market which can damage your investments in a way, so it's still going to damage you indirectly.

Another way but for everyone not just you are proper regulations that support users. It's going to take a lot of time and effort though, so for the time being, proper education about the current crypto scene would help an individual investor protect his funds at the very least. And it's not really a surefire way to trust a third party or regulations at times, at the very least, it's still best to rely on yourself for the most part.

And the good news is...? While I do consider an exchange closing down and people learning and solidifying the idea of "not your keys, not your coins" good news, I'd say it has a pretty negative effect on the market. Additionally, even though I don't fully follow the price but there should be some points in time where you would've been able to profit, albeit really small though. If you were looking for big profits, then a day, heck even a month, or a year wouldn't be enough time, especially since we're still feeling the bearish sentiment.

I suggest taking a break, and maybe switching over to DCA so you don't have to mind the price all the time.

Pretty sure you can access casinos via mobile browsers. I reckon when the casino was in development, they already argued whether to make a mobile app or not, but seeing as the main platform for the casino was browsers, which encompass both pc and mobile, they saw no need for it. If they do try to develop an android application for it, they'd have to develop it for iOs as well. This can all be summed up as needless expense, which they can probably put out for better use.

And in all honesty, accessing it via mobile browsers sounds fine already imo. It's not like casinos have some special features that request the necessity for it to become an application.

Isn't that like, the basics you should know before even trading? And the lesson that FTX showed this week (and the past) has always been a lesson most people have advocated here, to not use exchanges as your wallets. Another idea was to not invest in sht coins that don't have value, you don't want to invest anything that relies solely on "trust" as its backing.

Understanding the market as well is always good, FTX users panicking and selling their coins inevitably led to the market dipping a bit in the past week, if you were able to foresee that after the initial FTX issue release then you can profit off of it by shorting these past few days.

The commission thing is really interesting in a way, pushes the idea of people being willing to put their bets in public and let others copy it as well. But the idea of someone winning due to a copy and someone losing due to a copy kind of gives an irky feeling. I mean it's fair ngl, but if you look at it on paper, it kind of feels... bad...? (I don't have any better terms for it). But I guess that's part of the strategy of "copying" someone else's bet I guess.

On another note though, since copy bets CAN be public, wouldn't some users simply, well, bet on their own instead? Instead of pressing the "Copy" bet button from the profile of someone, they just set it up themselves on their own so that they don't have to pay the commission fee. It might be good if it was a minor feature, but if turned major by casinos then it might just simply become useless in the long run. (If commissions for bet copys was still implemented).

One, suicides aren't solely due to gambling, there are a lot of factors that can influence it. Now if we were to limit it to suicides solely due to gambling, I'd consider it wouldn't really have any effect. A ban wouldn't really stop people deep into the gambling hole. Here's an example, a crazy person wouldn't necessarily stop being delirious if you were to suddenly bound him right? A cure is needed, not a stopgap

If banning was all it needed, then countries would've done so with cigarettes, alcohol, and other vices. The government and a lot of anti-gambling orgs have probably tried spreading awareness of gambling time and time again, but since the population their trying to affect is too great, it isn't really that effective. One-on-one therapy probably exists but it costs money, and the initiative has to start with the gambler themselves, so it isn't really an option.

I'd rather help people by teaching them proper gambling habits instead. If they want to gamble then do so, but at least they'd know what the limits are.