OP, you have given all the advice that should NOT be done by plebs like us, ESPECIALLY during where and how the market currently is. NOW, it's time to save as much as we can and accumulate. There might be another crash, large or small, but the next months whether the crash happens, or doesn't happen, WILL be the time for ACCUMULATION = Buy and HODL. Tell me during 2025 if I'm wrong or not.  |
|
|
|
But THERE IS a solution, just like Bitcoin was designed to give the user the capability to go around regulations, building a casino to process its transactions directly onchain can also give the casinos the same regulation-avoiding capabilities. DirectBet was a true onchain Bitcoin casino. The was user never requires to make an account, or required to make a deposit. Everything was done onchain. Although, it was slow and inefficient during high network congestion. I would like to see it built on "faster" blockchains, like Litecoin/Dogecoin. Well, what can you say if they are not like that?. I didn't read somewhere on the site that they are on-chain. Most of the casinos I know are not like that where you deposited any amount but your account already have balance meanwhile the transaction is not yet confirmed or the site requires more than 1 confirmation needed before the balance is there. Many gambling sites use that method so that their gamblers won't have to wait for confirmations before their balance shows up in their account and in withdrawals won't be a problem since it's going to the gambler's wallet. Ser, DirectBet was one of the old casinos in Bitcoin, but they already closed during 2017 before you registered your account. You can read their announcement thread, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=393147.0They were the only on-chain casino that didn't require the user to open an account, didn't require to deposit their coins, and definitely didn't require KYC. It was truly a censorship-resistant casino built on top of the Bitcoin blockchain. It was probably inefficient, and slow when the network was congested, but it was working. |
|
|
|
~ Well, I can see you point. If for someone it is more entertaining to treat gambling like business, let it be so. Indeed, free people can choose to entertain themselves however they want, unless other people don't suffer from it. Only if we start treating gambling like business, especially when playing purely luck-based games, we may possibly lose so much money that our close ones can be affected. And that's what I'm warning against.
But the topic is about finding those casinos that are "really most rewarding", not about whether we should treat gambling more for entertainment, or more "like a business". Plus I don't agree that because a user is trying to look for better casino rewards, he is simply treating gambling like a business. No, a user SHOULD always look for better rewards for losing all his money in the casinos. If the reward is not that good, why lose money there? Lose it where he/she will be rewarded better. If by "reward" you mean dopamine release in the brain, I totally agree with you, but if the reward is money, no. I insist that seeking for a "most rewarding Crypto Casino" is dangerous. Because you can "find" one and win a lot of money during your first several days of playing there, and it can be the beginning of disaster for you, if you don't know that gambling should never be treated like a way of making money. I'm not debating you in what you're thinking, I was merely talking about OP's main points, in that he's looking for the casino that gives the best rewards whether or not the person is gambling for relaxation and entertainment, or if he/she is gambling for profit/treating it like a business. I believe there's also a third type of gambler. Plebs like me who wants a challenge in mastering the game. That's why I'm playing only Craps because it's not entirely gambling. Craps is designed for strategy, it's not like Sic Bo. |
|
|
|
the blocks are FULL most of the time.
That's simply not true because actually MOST OF THE TIME, it's not, and we can pay 1 to 3 sats per vByte and find our transactions within the next three blocks. Mempool for one year.  You're supposed to show chart of average block size rather than chart of mempool size. Here are few example, Technically, yes. I was merely making a point that, most of the time, if we pay for 1 to 3 sats per vByte, we do find out transactions within 5 blocks, don't we not? Network is not congested like what the troll-gaslighter makes us believe.
windfury yet again you miss many points and you are truly unethical crap you say and social drama insults on bitcoiners and the network has not gone unnoticed.
Unethical? Didn't you claim that Bitcoin "bilaterally split into two" and also tried to disinform and gaslight everyone into believing that BCash = "also Bitcoin". You are so ethical, franky1.  Social drama? Segwit is done/implemented, and BCash has done their hard fork to become an altcoin. You should accept that. It's you who's the drama queen by forcing the issue, spreading tin-foil hat conspiracy theories that the Core developers are conspiring with Barry Silbert to keep the blocks small. |
|
|
|
A total bonus amount that releases in fixed amounts is a great idea, bring it to admin.
I already suggested it in the chatbox, and BlackJack.Fun's official thread.
Unfortunately, I think wagering freespins should go to bonus account, it's good for continuance and that's good for everyone. Bjfun has to make money also.
The coins won from the free spins that were accumulated from voting and from using the chatbox, definitely YES. They should go to the bonus wallet and to be cleared by the user. BUT, all coins won from the free spins that were accumulated from the user's payment of casino fees through playing/gambling should be given directly to the user. I believe they should be separate, and should be treated like cashback rewards. |
|
|
|
the blocks are FULL most of the time.
That's simply not true because actually MOST OF THE TIME, it's not, and we can pay 1 to 3 sats per vByte and find our transactions within the next three blocks. Mempool for one year. Plus the congestion caused by Binance's deposit-reserve shuffle/consolidation of UTXOs was gone within the week. I believe the miners were very happy to do their jobs. |
|
|
|
windfury i gave the data
The data that you gave, asking where was the capacity "promised" by Segwit. If there's not enough demand, then what do we need bigger blocks for then, franky1? A hard fork to bigger blocks would only make the Bitcoin network go through all the risks, with little benefit to the network. Do you actually believe the disapproval of the Core developers for big blocks is "because politics"? Or is that what you want everyone to believe? Stop the social drama. Roger Ver, and your community have your big blocks with BCash. You should be happy and promote that, to prove that bigger blocks actually are needed. Not the social drama that you have been posting, attacking the Core developers. |
|
|
|
Is the game with low house edge like Dice, Roulette and Cards that gives draw result is credited to the wagering requirements to clear the bonus? I still have 1mbtc reward left on my wallet but I'm hesitant to play just to claim it because x40 is not joke for small player like me. I might lose more than the potential bonus that I can get while the reward is not actually fixed but random based on slot profit when I received that bonus. The only way to claim the bonus without hurting much my balance is to play only on low house edge games but I remember that doing this will not count towards wager based on last update that I know before I quit.
This freespins reward of blackjack.fun is really awesome because you can get it for free. The only thing that makes it unappealing is the wagering requirements. x20 is more manageable than the x40 current requirements. Thanks btw for summarizing the current reward of the casino.
I believe a better trade-off for small players like us would be for BlackJack.Fun to release the coins from the bonus wallet at $0.10 per $10.00 wagered. Waiting for the user to wager the full amount of x40 of the bonus would make him/her lose his/her entire deposit before clearing the whole bonus, requiring another deposit. It will make users feel defeated and leave. Plus I believe the free spins won from the votes, and the free spins from playing should be treated separately. Free spins earned from playing should be treated like a cashback by the casino with no wagering requirement. |
|
|
|
~ Does anyone have any analysis or website with this kind of info statistically laid out?
It looks like you are treating gambling like a serious business. Don't do that, lest you become a victim of various scammers that will promise you the "highest RTP possible", "best daily, weekly, monthly rewards" and stuff, while in fact you won't be able to withdraw any of your money after depositing. Treat gambling as entertainment and play the games you like rather than those where you "can win more". If you have a real job, do not look for additional income, especially through gambling. Make money with your job, and use gambling for relaxation. I believe it's OK for the user, especially us plebs, to treat the act of gambling more seriously and as a business. It will make us lose less, give is a higher probsbility of winning, and reclaim back some of the advantage the casino over us through house edge. BUT I also have the same opinion as yours that it shouldn't be about "the highest RTP", or "the best daily/weekly/monthly rewards. It should be more about to choose games to play, and the strategy in how to play them to lower house edge. The profit will come by themselves through consistency and good strategy. Well, I can see you point. If for someone it is more entertaining to treat gambling like business, let it be so. Indeed, free people can choose to entertain themselves however they want, unless other people don't suffer from it. Only if we start treating gambling like business, especially when playing purely luck-based games, we may possibly lose so much money that our close ones can be affected. And that's what I'm warning against. But the topic is about finding those casinos that are "really most rewarding", not about whether we should treat gambling more for entertainment, or more "like a business". Plus I don't agree that because a user is trying to look for better casino rewards, he is simply treating gambling like a business. No, a user SHOULD always look for better rewards for losing all his money in the casinos. If the reward is not that good, why lose money there? Lose it where he/she will be rewarded better. Actually can note gambling as entertainment and so people seems gambling as also a business which is partially correct the look of the things, so gambling the methods and mindset of gambling currently are varies and that is why everyone is being it's concept of understanding and defining gambling with their own ways of understanding gambling, so it depends of what you have in mind in gambling will determine your plans over gambling. You're post is confusing. Haha. Looking for the best rewards is not about whether the person is gambling for entertainment, or treating gambling "as a business". I'm very sure ANYONE would really like playing in the casino that's giving more/better rewards/incentives than the casino that's giving less rewards. It's practical, and sensible. Before BlackJack.Fun imposed a wagering requirement for the free spins won in the casino, it had the best incentives for users to play. |
|
|
|
The bad thing about this is that I am sure that the majority of the population will believe it. The digital euro, with which they are going to control all payments and be able to put an expiry date on it or block it if they feel like it, they have started to sell it as something that is convenient for the population, of course. Digital euro: a common European projectOn the subject of privacy, I'm laughing my head off: The first one is privacy. In our public consultation, 43% of respondents ranked privacy as the most important aspect of the digital euro, well ahead of other features. So it is clear that if we want the digital euro to be attractive, it needs to be designed in a way that meets people's privacy expectations.
We seek to ensure high standards of privacy for digital euro users. But full anonymity such as offered by cash does not appear a viable option in my opinion. It would contravene other public policy objectives such as ensuring compliance with anti-money laundering rules and combating the financing of terrorism. And it would also make it virtually impossible to limit the use of the digital euro as a form of investment for example via holding limits or tiered remuneration for which identities of users need to be known.
We should at least provide a level of privacy equal to that of current electronic payment solutions. So, no privacy. NONE! How can you trust a centralized entity who says that they will give you your privacy. The cabal behind Central Banks WILL LIE to you, and make everyone believe that CBDC is good for society, and WILL LIE to you and convince everyone that Bitcoin censorship-resistance = "bad". BUT CBDC should be encouraged by the community because it will make Bitcoin self-sovereignty and censorship-resistance more valuable. The majority of the population doesn't really suspect what else is there when the government tries to experiment on them. I believe many people/users of CBDC won't suspect anything during the first implementation. Everyone will be astonished in how "covenient", "fast", and "frictionless" CBDC usages are until one day the first iterations of censorship start to happen. Will I be using CBDC? I will be using CBDC because everyone may never have a choice, BUT I will always have my Bitcoin if I need censorship-resistant, hard-money. |
|
|
|
The bad thing about this is that I am sure that the majority of the population will believe it. The digital euro, with which they are going to control all payments and be able to put an expiry date on it or block it if they feel like it, they have started to sell it as something that is convenient for the population, of course. Digital euro: a common European projectOn the subject of privacy, I'm laughing my head off: The first one is privacy. In our public consultation, 43% of respondents ranked privacy as the most important aspect of the digital euro, well ahead of other features. So it is clear that if we want the digital euro to be attractive, it needs to be designed in a way that meets people's privacy expectations.
We seek to ensure high standards of privacy for digital euro users. But full anonymity such as offered by cash does not appear a viable option in my opinion. It would contravene other public policy objectives such as ensuring compliance with anti-money laundering rules and combating the financing of terrorism. And it would also make it virtually impossible to limit the use of the digital euro as a form of investment for example via holding limits or tiered remuneration for which identities of users need to be known.
We should at least provide a level of privacy equal to that of current electronic payment solutions. So, no privacy. NONE! How can you trust a centralized entity who says that they will give you your privacy. The cabal behind Central Banks WILL LIE to you, and make everyone believe that CBDC is good for society, and WILL LIE to you and convince everyone that Bitcoin censorship-resistance = "bad". BUT CBDC should be encouraged by the community because it will make Bitcoin self-sovereignty and censorship-resistance more valuable. |
|
|
|
At this point, we should start an effort to make LN nodes easier to use.
You should be able to run them and then it goes on autopilot like Bitcoind. I have ran c-lightning before: I am not quite sure whether it does channel balancing or even whether it automatically opens channels by default.
But average people wouldn't bother run a node even if it's easy to setup. For them, it's more convenient to run lightweight LN wallet such as Electrum, BlueWallet or Phoenix wallet. Even though there are some trade-off depending on software they choose. If there's an incentive to run a node, then I believe more people will run one. Is it about "human greed"? No, I believe not. It's simply human nature. Decentralization works/has been working in Bitcoin because there's an incentive structure that's making everything stick together. Remove the incentives, then what's the point? Bitcoin cannot be a multi-generational protocol through altruisim. Participating in the network must make practical sense. |
|
|
|
|
While the troll ignores the debate based on the hard data shown by him, and forces the issue that Bitcoin needs bigger blocks. He questioned where was the extra capacity "promised by Segwit", and he wants a hard fork to bigger blocks?
1. Segwit didn't promise more capacity, it was a fix for transaction malleability and had other upgrades for the network.
2. If average capacity is low, then why the need for bigger blocks?
BCash and BCash SV, which both claim to be the "Real Bitcoin", have bigger blocks. Where is the extra capacity they claimed that "their Bitcoin" needed?
Plus social drama? There is no social drama, franky1. It's the people like Roger Ver, and trolls like you that made social drama. You're merely gaslighting. Read the red trust rating given to you by gmaxwell and achow.
|
|
|
|
The information OP provided here are the same information from the site you also provided that means the op is marketing the site for the broker. And for the price or amount placed by the OP which $1.5m to sell the casino site is not too expenses because if the buyer is a genuine person and he handles the casino company very well with his customers, he can gain his money back within the 15 years stipulated time. But what I will consider is that after the purchase of the site, the new owner of the site will still spend enough to set up the site therefore, the seller should also consider those expenses and reduce the price. I believe you mean "not too expensive"? OK, but the question, how much capital would a person need to start a new online casino, and how much would be the difference from OP's $1,500,000 asking price for his casino? If it's still a "growing casino", I'm sure the new owner would be required to spend more for marketing to scale the business more, and the cryptocurrency online casino business is very competitive. Check how many Official Threads we have in the gambling subforum, all competing for our attention. It's sometimes very hard to keep updated because there are many of them. |
|
|
|
For sale is an online growing casino website, generating in the last 6 months an average of $47,259.96, and growing. The website has 27 income sources. Low operational costs compared to the revenue generated. Included in the sale are: - The main revenue-generating website
- 3 extra domains
- Social media accounts: Pinterest, Twitter, and Tumblr accounts
- Support will be provided
- Seller can help with opening new affiliate accounts
- Seller might consider business financing
Firstly I would like to talk about the reasons for website sale, for reason number 1 you can work on improving as per the customer's requirements. For numbers 2 & 3, I can say that you can quickly achieve your goals if you pay full attention and focus on your site. Also, for number 4, you can hire a good SCO resource to manage your SEO load. Also, your demand of 1.5 Million dollars is way much high. That's easy to say, but it's definitely "more complicated". Starting a business, running it yourself, then trying to scale it in very competitive conditions during a BEAR MARKET is not easy. OP wants to sell it because he probably sees NOW as an opportunity to get his ROI faster + future profits now. A short cut. Although OP might be telling the truth about his casino having lower operating costs vs. revenue generated, I believe his selling price might be too high. |
|
|
|
~ Does anyone have any analysis or website with this kind of info statistically laid out?
It looks like you are treating gambling like a serious business. Don't do that, lest you become a victim of various scammers that will promise you the "highest RTP possible", "best daily, weekly, monthly rewards" and stuff, while in fact you won't be able to withdraw any of your money after depositing. Treat gambling as entertainment and play the games you like rather than those where you "can win more". If you have a real job, do not look for additional income, especially through gambling. Make money with your job, and use gambling for relaxation. I believe it's OK for the user, especially us plebs, to treat the act of gambling more seriously and as a business. It will make us lose less, give is a higher probsbility of winning, and reclaim back some of the advantage the casino over us through house edge. BUT I also have the same opinion as yours that it shouldn't be about "the highest RTP", or "the best daily/weekly/monthly rewards. It should be more about to choose games to play, and the strategy in how to play them to lower house edge. The profit will come by themselves through consistency and good strategy. Well, I can see you point. If for someone it is more entertaining to treat gambling like business, let it be so. Indeed, free people can choose to entertain themselves however they want, unless other people don't suffer from it. Only if we start treating gambling like business, especially when playing purely luck-based games, we may possibly lose so much money that our close ones can be affected. And that's what I'm warning against. But the topic is about finding those casinos that are "really most rewarding", not about whether we should treat gambling more for entertainment, or more "like a business". Plus I don't agree that because a user is trying to look for better casino rewards, he is simply treating gambling like a business. No, a user SHOULD always look for better rewards for losing all his money in the casinos. If the reward is not that good, why lose money there? Lose it where he/she will be rewarded better. |
|
|
|
I don't think that there's a solution for that. Casinos that ask KYC will always stop gamblers to withdraw their balance until they passed the KYC which it's purpose is entirely about AML. The problem with that is even though a gambler won huge amount and wanted to withdraw and yet they still ask KYC when you can check the gambler's record when that person won in that bet. As far as I noticed, those who open an accusation thread is that the person who won provided an information about the winning bet and yet the casino ask for KYC to withdraw (some cases not get paid until they open a scam accusation).
But THERE IS a solution, just like Bitcoin was designed to give the user the capability to go around regulations, building a casino to process its transactions directly onchain can also give the casinos the same regulation-avoiding capabilities. DirectBet was a true onchain Bitcoin casino. The was user never requires to make an account, or required to make a deposit. Everything was done onchain. Although, it was slow and inefficient during high network congestion. I would like to see it built on "faster" blockchains, like Litecoin/Dogecoin. |
|
|
|
Hello Guys.
Yes. Today morning we had a time frame where site was down because of some technical failure. We are very sorry about it. As soon as we discovered it got it fixed.
Meanwhile thank you all for a great ideas. Soon we will start rewarding them.
Can anyone apply as an affiliate, and use the referral link in another forum, or in Twitter/Facebook. I believe I have some friends who might want to try Bitcoin, and what are the best things to do to have fun with your Bitcoins, if not gambling with Bitcoins? Hahaha. Plus truly no changes in x40 wagering requirements for the coins won through free spins/continue treating them as bonuses instead of treating them as cashback for users? |
|
|
|
You should ask the manager, or probably also the participants of BlackJack.Fun's signature campaign, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5422422.0They were required to make an account as an affiliate to participate in the campaign. If they were allowed to join as affiliates without being connected with a casino/company, then I believe you should join their campaign too. Perhaps you'll also be allowed to use your referral link outside of the forum. |
|
|
|
I heard that the banking system of P2P transfers works much worse in Europe. To confirm transfers, you need to call the bank or send a fax. CBDC will give more opportunities for people to easily and quickly make P2P transfers and exchange cryptocurrencies for CBDC.
Read "The Last Stand" in OP. Why would you trust the government with a protocol for programmable money which they can do how, and whatever they want. CBDC will not be like cash, ser. Cash which is hard to censor. A CBDC will be a currency which CAN be censored, with your I.D. attached to every transaction. If the Central Bank wanted that NOT ONE SINGLE CENT would go to Bitcoin exchanges, then for them it has never been easier. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
