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. |
|
|
|
An essay written from a standpoint of someone who actually understands what Bitcoin truly is, but writes something disingenuous to gaslight the readers, OR it's written by someone who is utterly oblivious.
Bitcoin is rarely used for legal transactions
Transactions are transactions, what's the point? Fiat has been used for many many years for illegal transactions before Bitcoin.
Regulation can be misunderstood as approval
They missed the actual point of why a true, decentralized, censorship-resistant cryptocurrency exists, which is to be used whether there is, or there is no regulation.
Promoting Bitcoin bears a reputational risk for banks
If you don't like it, IGNORE IT. But they can't ignore it, no?  The European Central Bank's "Last Stand" against Bitcoin will be their way to promote their CBDC, a CBDC with the users' Digital I.D. attached to it, controlling where they can spend, and not spend a form of money that they don't truly own. |
|
|
|
Hey guys,
With all the KYC talk lately I wanted to open up a thread and ask about your opinion.
The side of the user:
- Prefers no KYC
- Prefers anon coins as a payment platform
- If a KYC is triggered, they want to trust the brand with their documents
The side of the casino:
- Regulators are asking them to do KYC, but they need to find a balance on when it's triggered. E.g. to keep a portion of the user happy, they can rise the trigger to a certain amount.
- They are tied to a payment provider, either because of the license or CMS, and can offer only a certain portion of cryptocurrency.
- Users are abusing them if there's absolutely no KYC matrix in the system.
What would, in your opinion, be the best balance here?
"Balance" is looking for a solution that's impossible with the current system of centralized services, using a decentralized cryptocurrency. You will always be entrusting your coins into the custody of another entity. There will never be a perfect balance in such a system, merely trade-offs, and often times it will be more advantageous the casino because they hold your money. I believe the only solution that would be advantageous for the user was something like DirectBet's system. No accounts needed, no deposits and withdrawals necessary, everything done through blockchain, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=393147.0 |
|
|
|
Thanks to the minimal block size increase of the Segwit soft fork.
............... 5 years on.. still waiting for the extra tx on chain capacity segwit promised  so what are you thanking segwit for exactly?? That's because of actual average usage/demand. If that's your debate, then WHY do we actually need a hard fork to bigger block sizes? Was it probably all a red herring to hard fork the protocol away from the Core developers? The debate for bigger blocks did start from Gavin Andresen and Mike Hearn, which Mike Hearn FUD that if Bitcoin didn't hard fork to bigger a block size "Bitcoin will die". What implementations/proposals did you support with jonald_fyookball?
Plus didn't you try to gaslight people into believing that Bitcoin and BCash "bilaterally split", and therefore according to you, BCash is not an altcoin?
ok you wanna poke some social drama rather then discuss the "resource" debate at hand in this topic -Snipped gaslight about Segwit- It's not social drama, it's a FACT. You actually said it. |
|
|
|
I have done nothing wrong here and I will happily dox myself publicly to prove you are in the wrong.
It's just coincidence you bringing this problem after the recent problem has resolved, you created this account today and brought your problem. How did you know about this forum and just contact owl.games after Cryptostuneris's problem just solved yesterday? Too much coincidence IMO I believe, that because some users play with large amounts of money in online casinos, it would be for the best for all of those users to be warned that using VPNs "might put them in more problemetic situations" when asked for their documents/I.D. Anyone who probably has played in casinos regularly, OR has tried day trading in different centralized exchanges, has always experienced KYC. More than 90% of them probably has not alarmed the casinos/exchanges, but why do some of them make a brand new account, and complain more loudly than usual in the forum? |
|
|
|
Not really a "must" to have a lot of money to reach those levels. Sure you still need a good amount of money, but I have seen people do 2000x which means 1 btc could be a good enough level.
I am not saying that's how you can do it, maybe you will fail and not be able to do it, but for 2000 btc wagered, that doesn't require 2000 btc as well, it requires maximum of 10 btc and that's still a lot but that's about 160k dollars lost, we have seen people losing hundreds and hundreds of bitcoins in the crypto world even when bitcoin was a lot. Just last year when it was high I saw someone losing 300 btc, so it is not really a shocking result to me, it's normal in the crypto world.
But we're talking about the famous whale, named Real Winner. He's a regular in BlackJack.Fun, a high roller player who plays almost everyday in the casino. Rolling BTC2000 with just BTC1 as your capital, he would need to be very lucky not to lose it all. I'm sure he can win and/or lose more than BTC1 in a week. Plus if you're a regular player, and having just BTC1 as your capital, you must follow some strategy for capital management to protect from big losses. I believe Real Winner is a BlackJack, and a Plinko regular? I agree on what he said because even me I can sometimes wager a high amount using only a small capital but I think it doesn't happen at all times but most of the times I can only wager sufficient amounts because it will be a loss to the casino if they make their games easier for the players because you know, we can also get rewards through wagering and amount of it can base on how high or low we wager. Whales have big budgets so it is more possible for them to wager that high even at all times because once they lose their deposits, they can always redeposit again and again till they hit their desired wager amounts. I'm merely saying, that if someone reaches total wagered amount in the casino that high, it's more probable that it's a whale than a pleb. A person with small capital can't expect to win/beat the house edge consistently if he/she doesn't follow a strategy for capital management. Rolling a capital of BTC1 to BTC100 or more total wagered will definitely risk the player to lose some of that Bitcoin, or maybe all in some situations. |
|
|
|
There are Bitcoiners, such as Peter Todd, who are starting to believe that there should be continued block rewards through a "tail emission" for Bitcoin to support the system. I made a topic asking about it before, but no one joined. Hahaha.
Where did you make such topic? I can't find it. There was a 9-page discussion on this in summer, though: "Surprisingly, Tail Emission Is Not Inflationary" -- A post by Peter ToddI can't find it too, maybe it was just a post in one of someone else's topic, but the "shower thought" behind it was not essentially a tail emission, but a soft fork to decide, yes or no, to a hard fork for maintaining the block rewards by cancelling any future halvings. For example a hard fork, starting on 2048 block rewards are maintained to be at BTC0.04882812 per block until all the coins are mined, cancelling all future halvings. I'm trying to find it. I found another post of mine, posting about it, but I can't find the original, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5357973.msg57847458#msg57847458 |
|
|
|
Let's talk about how things generally are. Would it be wrong to say that an increase in block size = require more resources = centralizing?
The question can be answered simply, not your usual confusing posts designed to trick and gaslight everyone into questioning themselves. Because if bigger blocks was actually needed, then why didn't everyone start using BCash, the coin of which you supported, and which you also claimed to be "Bitcoin"? Plus big blockers always avoid answering the question, "does ANYONE believe that BCash's maximum block size is not centralizing for its network, if the demand for its block space goes as high as the demand for Bitcoin's block space"? answer is NOPE!! Thanks to the minimal block size increase of the Segwit soft fork. But I'm asking about BCash's hard fork to 32MB block sizes. If we pretend that BCash does gain more demand for block space, and those blocks get filled with a minimum 10MB of data every block, you believe that it wouldn't increase bandwidth and hardware requirements = centralizing the network?
i supported progressing bitcoin [not to be confused with other promoted networks brand stealing the name] to allow more transactions on the bitcoin network. on the main net of bitcoin and not via some other crappy side network people want to push people onto and away from bitcoin
What implementations/proposals did you support with jonald_fyookball? Plus didn't you try to gaslight people into believing that Bitcoin and BCash "bilaterally split", and therefore according to you, BCash is not an altcoin? |
|
|
|
How can we discuss which casino is most rewarding, when everything is about luck. All these talks about house edge, deposit bonuses, faucets, other free stuff is just cheap. They are made only to hold a gambler. If someone talk about how one casino is better, because their bonus is great, then I would like to see how he obtains this bonus first, to see how much time, effort and money will he spend doing it. Casinos can not be most rewarding, then can only be less troublesome then others, since they all offer the same.
I believe you must also get the context of OP. Because winning in casino games is just about luck, then what casino among ALL casinos does give the best daily/weekly/monthly rewards, loyalty programs, cashback programs, deposit bonuses, reload bonuses, and VIP programs for the user? The reason for the user to look for the best rewards is not to look for profit, but to look for a casino that takes care of their users. The question, what is the casino that best takes care of you? |
|
|
|
1. There is no relation between PoW energy consumption and # of transactions so talking about energy used per transaction is nonsensical.
There will be in a few decades when the block subsidy dwindles into insignificance and the network security is mostly funded by transaction fees. That's just simply not true. The lack of relation between PoW energy consumption and number of transactions has nothing to do with the fact that there is a block reward. The two systems are entirely unrelated. When miners get mostly, or even only, tx fees the mining energy consumption and number of transactions will still not be related at all. Number of transactions is decided by block time and block size limit, which have nothing to do with amount of energy used by miners. Think about this: Would number of transactions change if a year from now mining was 1/10th what it is today, or 10x what it is today? Nope. It would have zero effect on number of transactions processed. Transactions will simply continue to stay at the limit of what Bitcoin can handle no matter how much or how little energy is used. Thank you for pointing out the educational gap in Bitcoin. You're a "hero member" on this forum, so presumably you've been into Bitcoin for a while. And no offense, but even you just got something basic about Bitcoin totally wrong. This just emphasizes the lack of education about Bitcoin because if someone who has been around Bitcoin for a while can get something as basic as that wrong, it kinda drives home the point about why the average person who knows nothing about Bitcoin can so easily buy into the false bad optics spread by the media and politicians about Bitcoin. Although you must remember, the incentive structure developed within the system of Bitcoin is what's making everything stick together. If the miners are not incentivized, do you actually believe they would continue mining altruistically at cost? There are Bitcoiners, such as Peter Todd, who are starting to believe that there should be continued block rewards through a "tail emission" for Bitcoin to support the system. I made a topic asking about it before, but no one joined. Hahaha. |
|
|
|
Let's talk about how things generally are. Would it be wrong to say that an increase in block size = require more resources = centralizing?
-Snip- The question can be answered simply, not your usual confusing posts designed to trick and gaslight everyone into questioning themselves. Because if bigger blocks was actually needed, then why didn't everyone start using BCash, the coin of which you supported, and which you also claimed to be "Bitcoin"? Plus big blockers always avoid answering the question, "does ANYONE believe that BCash's maximum block size is not centralizing for its network, if the demand for its block space goes as high as the demand for Bitcoin's block space"? |
|
|
|
Onchain data from GlassNode illustrates the truth that 66% of the TOTAL Bitcoins in circulation have stopped moving for the last 12 months. I believe it's the highest in the whole history of Bitcoin's existence? Bitcoin in exchanges are also going down and DOWN since the crash of FTX. Less Bitcoin in exchanges = less panic selling.  |
|
|
|
So you actually believe that a regular user in the forum with only his/her laptop, and with limited capital can actually out-trade the market bots developed by some of the most experienced traders/smartest math-people in the world? Who also has a larger capital, and who has more access to more market information than plebs like us. Perhaps drawing lines on a chart will not work against that. By that logic no one should be looking just for TA to make money with trading except few people on the top? And they would be somehow successful most of the time? If you're a pleb like us, you could remain to be hopeful, try to probably "get lucky" and make a profit large enough to start trading for money. But those who "get lucky" are very few, and those people are mostly the hardest workers, and the smartest traders. By that logic, you can try to "get lucky", but plebs like us should also know when to accept to stop day trading, and start buying the DIP, and HODL. |
|
|
|
Reducing block time is bad for security. Just look at exchanges: the faster the block times, the more the confirmations they want for deposits.
Bitcoin ~10 minute blocks were pretty well thought and I would not expect that to change in the near future.
If one wants fast transactions, he should look at LN, not try to change a perfectly working bitcoin.
Plus not many people, especially newbies, have considered that it's about settlement assurances. Other blockchains might be "faster", but the settlement assurances are lower. If compared to Bitcoin, 1 confirmation would be equal to 50 or more confirmations for that other blockchain, neutralizing the "advantage" because Bitcoin blocks have more accumulated miner-costs. |
|
|
|
At the present time, most of the technical analysis indicators do not work, for example, all moving averages have been broken during the past months, and therefore it has become useless to rely on them as points of support and resistance.
Therefore, publishing such analyzes is more waste of effort than benefit.
They are merely guides, that "may" help the "trader", but it isn't a crystal ball that can make you trade with 100% accuracy. If there was such an indicator, then why would the user share or boast about. He/she would keep it secret, and simply trade. The more traders that know/use of a profitable indicator, the effectiveness it has will go down because those traders would adjust and counter-adjust. |
|
|
|
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.
How can you lower the house edge? Is there any strategy you tried yourself and helped you achieve this? By playing games that allow you to use strategy to lower house edge. I can't speak for BlackJack from actual experience, but as an illustration, doubling down in BlackJack decreases house edge by 0.2%. For Craps, a game which I always play, you can play with a lower house edge if most of your strategy plays around the No. 6 and 8, or if you play a strategy that uses the Don't Pass line and the Come Bets in combination. Although you might not win big with that strategy, you also won't lose big. You can research Craps betting guides/strategies, and find them in YouTube. Don't you play BlackJack? I thought you already know this. There are many BlackJack players in forum, but not many Craps players. |
|
|
|
Not really a "must" to have a lot of money to reach those levels. Sure you still need a good amount of money, but I have seen people do 2000x which means 1 btc could be a good enough level.
I am not saying that's how you can do it, maybe you will fail and not be able to do it, but for 2000 btc wagered, that doesn't require 2000 btc as well, it requires maximum of 10 btc and that's still a lot but that's about 160k dollars lost, we have seen people losing hundreds and hundreds of bitcoins in the crypto world even when bitcoin was a lot. Just last year when it was high I saw someone losing 300 btc, so it is not really a shocking result to me, it's normal in the crypto world.
But we're talking about the famous whale, named Real Winner. He's a regular in BlackJack.Fun, a high roller player who plays almost everyday in the casino. Rolling BTC2000 with just BTC1 as your capital, he would need to be very lucky not to lose it all. I'm sure he can win and/or lose more than BTC1 in a week. Plus if you're a regular player, and having just BTC1 as your capital, you must follow some strategy for capital management to protect from big losses. I believe Real Winner is a BlackJack, and a Plinko regular? |
|
|
|
~ 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. |
|
|
|
That must be nice to have accumulated a large amount of capital exclusively for gambling. They have wagered it, and talking about 100 BTC or 2k BTC, I think it totally depends on the current price of Bitcoin? If not, the wagers will be different at different prices each time they were played. But to reach 100 or 2,000 BTC wagered, they must be having larger betting amounts, and to do that, must also have a much larger amount of capital than plebs like us.
What advice can you give small players like me, who struggle to build enough capital exclusively for BlackJack and Craps? Is there any other skill, outside of the games, that we should learn? A mental toughness to develop? Probably discipline?
Just take out your capital once you double it, it's possible as it is gambling. Play with your winnings and you will do great. Don't overdo it, win after win, the cycle of luck won't stay for longer, so you must know a point where you should stop doing it. Hahaha, that's very easy to say, but it's definitely very VERY hard to do. Plus what if you doubled your capital, withdrew your original deposit, then lost everything in your account? Should you send the original deposit again? here is mine!
1 I suggest creating a sort of "olympiad" or a "decathlon" of games.
users compete on different activities, blackjack, roulette, slots, video poker, mines etc and the winner is chosen from those who are able to achieve certain triggers in all games in the shortest time possible!
2 trivia! general knowledge questions / bitcoin theme give bonuses to players who are active in chat and provide the right question.
3 happy hour. at a certain random moment of the day, the possibility of playing some games with cashback/loss back promotions is offered.
4 insert a "points" system . every mbtc played allows you to get points that can be redeemed for cash prizes or physical prizes (gadgets / amazon vouchers etc)
5 head to head game. why gamble/play against bj admin? create match between players. it would be fun have a blackjack game between two random players (of course a percentage from each game is provided to admin...)
And CRAPS! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
