I believe there will be many of our fellow plebs who are going to sell from now to 2023, and they will actually be the same plebs who will FOMO back, and help cause another market surge during the next bull cycle. OK, but fellow plebs, the current state of the market is indeed truly frustrating, BUT just HODL. There are people in the market who are currently accumulating Bitcoin, knowing that the risk transfer required to start the next bull cycle is happening. Don't sell to these people, be one of these people.
For sure, I am not going to presume to know how long our current consolidation might last, if we might get lower BTC prices from here, or how far lower any such dip might go. You are correct Wind_FURY that this whole down market could last into 2023.. and sure it could last anywhere between another day and another 18 months, so in that regard, there can be quite a bit of uncertainty regarding how much time that any of us has to stack up on sats at these prices and potentially lower BTC prices. Of course, many of you realize (including you Wind_FURY) that I emphasize buying rather than HODLing, and for sure HODLing would be the second best scenario in the event that you do not have any money left to buy, and I do realize, as Wind_FURY mentioned, that there are going to be quite a few current bitcoiners (HODLers/Newbies) who could well get shaken out of their coins in the coming months as long as the BTC price does not go up from here... Yet this way of thinking about the future presumes either that BTC prices are going down from here, or the amount of up (perhaps flat) that we get from here, will not be enough to inspire confidence in continuing to HODL whatever BTC that the current HODLers happen to have... These could be signs of either being over-invested or just NOT having enough conviction in regards to having had bought BTC in recent times and likely being in the negative for a decent amount of time while bills are coming due and fear continues to linger about whether the BTC price is going to go up from here at any point in time in the near future. I believe the problem is "it's not having enough conviction" in HODLing. Over-investing + conviction = mentally insane person who can HODL in ALL kinds of market situations. Although buying during the DIPs of 2019 truly would help if you're HODLing today, it wasn't very easy during 2019, and especially during the Covid Crash of 2020. Placing your coins in cold storage will definitely help you from the temptation of selling. |
|
|
|
|
I believe there will be many of our fellow plebs who are going to sell from now to 2023, and they will actually be the same plebs who will FOMO back, and help cause another market surge during the next bull cycle. OK, but fellow plebs, the current state of the market is indeed truly frustrating, BUT just HODL. There are people in the market who are currently accumulating Bitcoin, knowing that the risk transfer required to start the next bull cycle is happening. Don't sell to these people, be one of these people.
|
|
|
|
You would be technically correct, but "they" didn't care about that when "they" sanctioned Tornado Cash.
I'm more than that: There's absolutely no sign from governments and AML services that a Wasabi CoinJoin is the holly grail of bitcoin outputs. Just because they've hired one chain analysis company to tell them which outputs they've analyzed completely shadily and non-transparently, and have reached the conclusion that are likely, according to their undisclosed measures, to be suspicious, it doesn't mean the rest of the world thinks likewise. That's not the point, because it's all not about you, or what you believe, or all about the rest of the world. It's also about "them", and "their" policies. WasabiWallet merely took the decision to block "illegal transactions" as a preventive measure. What would happen to all of those outputs that went through Tornado Cash?
I honestly don't know how it works, It's a mixer.
don't know how reliable that was,
Probably reliable enough.
and neither how they identified that the outputs come from Tornado Cash. I have never used Ethereum.
Let's assume they can, and will. What would happen to all of those outputs that went to a sanctioned mixer? WasabiWallet took the decision to block outputs used in "illegal transactions" as defined by "them", as a way to avoid "them" from sanctioning Wasabi.
I'm afraid they'll just block lots of transactions, some of which are going to be "illegal", and leave it there. You can't know for sure they've avoided sanctioning, but they're doing fine so far by bootlicking the authorities' beloved analysis company. If you were nopara73, what decision would you make, that you believe, would be best for yourself, WasabiWallet, and its users? I have my answer, I would like to hear yours first. |
|
|
|
truly untainted outputs
What the fuck. Truly untainted, based on who? By default, every output is " truly untainted", because bitcoins are fungible. That's what we're saying pages now. Based on "them", and "their rules". If you were truly reading my posts, you would truly get the context of my posts.
Protection from government sanctions.
No. If 10 out of the 300 inputs that are used in CoinJoin are "tainted" according to the chain analysis company, they can't file a lawsuit to every user who's part of the CoinJoin, that's just nonsense. Zero protection there. That's probably why they're implementing blacklisting in the first place. You would be technically correct, but "they" didn't care about that when "they" sanctioned Tornado Cash. And that was the point. What would happen to all of those outputs that went through Tornado Cash? WasabiWallet took the decision to block outputs used in "illegal transactions" as defined by "them", as a way to avoid "them" from sanctioning Wasabi. It's the user's choice if he/she wants to take the trade off of using Wasabi, or not. As illustrated by Tornado's sanction, will exchanges and other services really accept all those outputs that can be connected to Tornado? I believe they will not take that risk.
You're going off-topic again. Show me what protection do the users gain. The ability to send money to anti-privacy and pro-censorship services that treat bitcoin as non-fungible and enforce claptrap rules is irrelevant. Did you get my point/debate, or are you trying not to? I don't know why many people are so provoked by the trade off taken by WasabiWallet, and its users. n0nce, when you posted "WasabiWallet has no government blacklist", you mean they're not in a blacklist, is that correct? |
|
|
|
Mixers that mix bitcoin without letting it be obvious that it came from a mixer?
Shower thought. What if a mixer only accepted transactions sent to it through the Lightning Network? In theory, it could help with OP's question on how to "hide" the fact that someone used a mixer, because a transaction in the Lightning Network takes multiple hops before making it to the destination. It won't be your actual UTXOs that reaches the mixer. How will outside-observers know that you're actually using a mixer? shower with some soap thought locking funds up. and then using said references to then do some offchain swaps where the utxo to unlock of someone elses (random person) then goes to you. is better than spamming the network with traditional mixer span.. .. but if you then advertise that other network(LN) as a privacy enhancing tool ( like regulators already recognise LN as a privacy enhancing tool) still gets all the locks to LN red flagged yep all them locks listed on 1ml are red flagged as suspicious. You started the post reasonably, but there you are again, franky1. Starting to include subtle disinformation, and gaslighting techniques.
so you would need to create a whole new smart contract network. NOT advertise it as a privacy enhancing network (while physically ensuring you dont ask for info that breaks privacy) but where the other network facilitates legitimate usage and more then just a niche things. oh and also where the routing/payment process does not require a gossip policy to publicly displaying fund locks as part (because yea thats not actually privacy in the first place) to ensure its not super easy to know which locks are tied to LN channels.. because yea common sense..
a network advertising itself as a privacy tool but by default publicly gossips all the utxo's linked to its network references of channels.. is not really then private
I found this editorial opinion about the Gossip Protocol and the users' privacy from Bitcoin Magazine, which I will read later, https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/bitcoin-lightning-gossip-protocol-privacyPlus in theory, having a mixer accept Lightning Network deposits and withdrawals might not be needed because Lightning could already act as a "pseudo-mixer" when a user sends a transaction through multiple hops to himself. I believe it will be those "unintentional use cases" that might bring more demand for Lightning transactions. |
|
|
|
Common but pretty much enjoyable since this game is easy to play and understand that's why many gamblers love this game. And also many think that this is more easier to win because the selection of colors are few so I guess its not surprising to see that many gamblers are still playing this even if there are so many games selection offered by various casinos.
Gamblers prefer games that can be won easily compared to challenging games because of the small chance of games that are difficult to win, so it doesn't matter if the game will be boring but can get passive advantage from games that are easy to play, but because it includes dice games, the team will update resource game for hard-to-win levels with high bets. I believe not. Gamblers who prefer games without using the brain are a different type of gambler from those gamblers who prefer to play more "thinking games", like BlackJack, Poker, and Craps. I'm not saying that they don't like to think, or they have a low Intelligence Quotient, but the Bitcoin gambling community needs to promote those games that attract a different class of gambler, not just those who prefer to randomly click/tap bet. |
|
|
|
Mixers that mix bitcoin without letting it be obvious that it came from a mixer?
Shower thought. What if a mixer only accepted transactions sent to it through the Lightning Network? In theory, it could help with OP's question on how to "hide" the fact that someone used a mixer, because a transaction in the Lightning Network takes multiple hops before making it to the destination. It won't be your actual UTXOs that reaches the mixer. How will outside-observers know that you're actually using a mixer? |
|
|
|
Yeah! Blackjack.fun is constantly evolving. It means that the developers of the site do not stop on the achieved and they do everything possible for attracting new users. All this also affects the attendance of blackjack.fun it is constantly growing.
They will have more surprising things in the upcoming version. Hopefully, we will see the update sooner. It's delaying but we know late is always better than never. The team is very hard working. In the near future, I hope this will be bigger than Top  I hope the team also includes Evolution's craps dice games, either live craps or the first person game, to the site during the upgrade to Version 3! The current craps game the site has doesn't load. I have already informed the admin in the chat. I believe ANYONE who likes to play BlackJack will also like playing craps. It also requires strategy to play, it's not merely a game for throwing the dice to get lucky. Plus the site also has a "genre" called "craps", but those games are not really craps games, except for one game, the game that doesn't load. |
|
|
|
I want to ask again, and this time to the users. Will you use the Lightning Network if available? Or will you continue to use whichever altcoin you're currently using?
Lightening network is not what much casinos are in a look after and same is applicable to the gamblers as well, using a lightening network is by far a better option as long as the conditions warrant such which will help the payment system more faster and to cover as mny as possible transactions within a shortest time but users will always prefer using their altcoins in gambling because they have some varieties of them which are mostly supported by the casino they use. Plus there's a hidden "feature" in using the Lightning Network, "in theory". It's also an off-chain layer not just for faster, and cheaper transactions, it can help with your privacy too. Because if you send yourself a transaction, your transaction in Lightning takes multiple hops, and you receive outputs that are not connected to those UTXOs you sent. I believe that's one of the "hidden reason" why there's so much disinformation, FUD, and gaslighting regarding basic information about Lightning. There might be entities that don't plebs like us to use it. |
|
|
|
A lot of poker game tournaments have been announced on this board over time, and am I kind of wondering what makes poker games so inclined to the tournament and we don't see such competitions being announced for other games?
I do think that it is highly because of the nature of the game itself. Unlike other card games such as blackjack, etc., they fairly end quickly and the process is relatively simple compared to the techniques involved in poker. In addition, poker is one of those card games that mix luck, skill, and technique in order for you to win the game. Either you win due to the overwhelming card quality that you have on the pool, or because you bluffed the opponent even if your hand is bad. BlackJack requires some skill to win profitably too, but it's a different set of skills from poker. In poker, I believe it's a mix of math, probability and psychology because you are also playing against another player. In BlackJack it's more on just the math and probability, but it can be a good card game for tournaments. There's another casino game that requires skill to win profitability, and it's like BlackJack because it's more about just the math and probability. It's the dice game called CRAPS. Every gambler in the forum should play it. |
|
|
|
--snip--
Off-topic? Do we actually need to establish the fact that WasabiWallet's pool = also its users? I'm sorry, I thought you already understood that, and that we're on the same page in that matter. I do not consider owner/operator of Wasabi CoinJoin coordinator as user. To be specific, i'm talking about Wasabi Wallet user who use CoinJoin feature. But anyway, whether right or wrong, whether you agree or disagree, the point is nopara37 accepted the trade off, and the users also have a choice if they want to accept the trade off. Because anyone can use another mixer that doesn't blacklist outputs, or another team can run another coordinator that doesn't blacklist outputs.
I get the point, although i have to remind that, 1. Some user probably don't know about blacklist.
2. Most user doesn't even aware you can switch to different coordinator. I believe that's a debate for another topic. Plus to make myself and where I stand clear, I don't believe you are wrong in disagreeing in WasabiWallet's acceptance of taking the trade off, and blacklisting "tainted" outputs, or outputs used for "illegal transactions". I understand your debate in the matter because "taint" truly doesn't exist in the blockchain. BUT, with government sanctions on computer programs, services and public wallets, I'm merely making a point that it's up to the user/service if he/she/they want to accept those trade offs, or not. |
|
|
|
Do we actually need to establish the fact that WasabiWallet's pool = also its users? This is just not true. What's good for Wasabi team('s pocket) is definitely not necessarily good for the users as well. Wasabi team can be bribed to blacklist, make changes to their wallet software, shut down the whole thing-- which might be good for nopara and his fellow devs, but not for those who want to utilize Wasabi Wallet. I'll accept that there's always that risk, and that also opens a bigger debate that ALL other developers of mixers and protocols that obfuscate outputs can also be bribed. But that's for another topic. But the point is, Wasabi's pool = users' outputs being mixed together.
So here's the question again: What protection do users get from blacklisting? Wasabi team gains the benefit to avoid shutting down from sanctions (if only there were any), or whatever; what do the users gain?
If only truly untainted outputs enter Wasabi's pool? Protection from government sanctions. As illustrated by Tornado's sanction, will exchanges and other services really accept all those outputs that can be connected to Tornado? I believe they will not take that risk. You can debate that the government can still sanction Wasabi for anything. OK you might be right, it can. But my debate is about the trade offs. Either the users accept it, or not. Simple. |
|
|
|
Michael Saylor will be called many stupid names during the current bear market, just like many of the earliest Bitcoin investors of 2012 were called "crazy" by legacy market investors. BUT, 2025 - 2026 bull market, Chad Saylor will be called the Legendary Genius Investor of the decade.
People with a slightly different vision from others are often ridiculed and part of the public considers them somewhat irrational, but they certainly understand the game of investing much better than the average investor. When Tim Draper said live on Fox News in 2014 that 1 BTC would be worth at least $10 000 in the next three years, everyone laughed at him afterwards, so it turned out that he was right. Saylor will no doubt end up being called a genius in a few years, unlike some others who freak out every time the price of Bitcoin goes into the red. The comparisons of Chad Saylor's Bitcoin investment will be with the investments of world's greatest investors, like Peter Lynch, and the man who called Bitcoin rat poison squared, Warren Buffett himself. OR, be in the same class of the investments of the world's greatest, legendary entreprenuers/business giants like John D. Rockefeller and Andre Carnegie. Let's laugh now, but wait for 2025 - 2026.  Bitcoin, there is no second best. |
|
|
|
--snip--
But that's not the point, and I'm not debating whether the "taint" is even real or not. The fact is, with the Tornado sanction, the government showed that it WILL sanction a non-person entity, a program for mixing outputs, if they see that it is mixing "tainted" outputs. I believe WasabiWallet's trade off, is merely trying to avoid a sanction by blocking "tainted" outputs. "Taint" as defined by "them", they invented it. Taint doesn't actually exist in the blockchain. You're going off-topic. What i asked was "what kind of protection user get from blacklist during CoinJoin?". But your response is about protection zkSNACKs/Wasabi team could get. Off-topic? Do we actually need to establish the fact that WasabiWallet's pool = also its users? I'm sorry, I thought you already understood that, and that we're on the same page in that matter. But anyway, whether right or wrong, whether you agree or disagree, the point is nopara37 accepted the trade off, and the users also have a choice if they want to accept the trade off. Because anyone can use another mixer that doesn't blacklist outputs, or another team can run another coordinator that doesn't blacklist outputs. |
|
|
|
A sad day for the bitcoin community. I wonder what made him do this. I mean he very well knows that bitcoin is going to make a new ATH in the future, so why step down now? $1b loss is a pocket change for a hedge fund as big as his.
Wait, what? MSTR isn't a hedge fund, it's....some kind of software company if I'm not mistaken, one that happened to have a bitcoin zealot as CEO. I kept writing in the other thread about MSTR that he could very well be booted by the board of directors, and I think that's likely what happened. Be skeptical about what press releases say, because companies can and do make up all sorts of bullshit when something important like a CEO being removed happens. Microstrategy is a software analytics company. Plus if it was truly a hedge fund, a $1,000,000,000 is NEVER just "a pocket change" for ANY hedge fund. Michael Saylor will be called many stupid names during the current bear market, just like many of the earliest Bitcoin investors of 2012 were called "crazy" by legacy market investors. BUT, 2025 - 2026 bull market, Chad Saylor will be called the Legendary Genius Investor of the decade. |
|
|
|
Just wondering, what kind of protection user get from blacklist during CoinJoin?
For those providing liquidity, it protects their Bitcoins. For users, it's the assurance than none of the UTXOs are "tainted", whatever that means for the government. It's trade off if you want to use Wasabi, or if you don't, you can use ChipMixer. I disagree for following reason. 1. Each government/exchange/analysis have different way to determine whether an UTXO is tainted or not. 2. It's unlikely UTXO from Wasabi CJ not treated suspiciously after blacklist is activated. AFAIK Wasabi team say it's not activated yet. 3. Regardless of existence of blacklist, liquidator's Bitcoin still safe unless there are bug on Wasabi Wallet or WabiSabi protocol which allow liquidator's Bitcoin to be stolen/unspendable. But that's not the point, and I'm not debating whether the "taint" is even real or not. The fact is, with the Tornado sanction, the government showed that it WILL sanction a non-person entity, a program for mixing outputs, if they see that it is mixing "tainted" outputs. I believe WasabiWallet's trade off, is merely trying to avoid a sanction by blocking "tainted" outputs. "Taint" as defined by "them", they invented it. Taint doesn't actually exist in the blockchain. |
|
|
|
I am currently playing first person craps, which I believe gives the player more opportunities to win, and more control over the bets/choices of bets. I actually discovered a beginner's strategy guide for craps while I was looking for a poker strategy guide,
Seems like controlling emotion and psychology is better than mathematics?,. and I think, Counting dice numbers every throw is very complicated because it has 6 equal sizes and weights, and luck is more highlighted. I often hear there are several gamblers who use that strategy which I think it's still 50% to win. imo It's not always 50% to win, using craps as an example, if the point is on 10, then the probsbility is against you because there are more possible ways to throw a 7 than a 10. Plus if the odds are truly 50% for you against the casino, the house edge, or the 1% or more fee, will always make it less than 50% probability for you. There are some strategies in craps that will make house edge less than 2%, but playing the field to cover the other numbers and get more opportunties to win is very tempting. |
|
|
|
A lot has happened on the blackjack fun website, the last time I visited the casino the present looks and development of the site have upgraded massively, and am impressed with that. And also seeing that this casino happened to carry a (
unique name for the popular game blackjack which sounds and gives a unique thought about the casino, I also read that the new version is on the way and I hope very soon you will be offering sports bookings on your casino, that will generate you more traffics most even now that various leagues have started.
What actually makes Blackjack.fun unique is its desire for the community to be active in the casino even if they're not gambling. The voting process for which whale wins the Hourly/Daily/Weekly Wagering Competitions, which gives free spins for the winning votes, encourages a community of irregular gamblers to come back to the site and "whale watch". Does the free spins expire within 24 hours? I voted for Real Winner last week, but I didn't receive any free spins. Did he lose to GOD? Because lately GOD has been playing a lot and have some wins in the hourly competitions when I browsed the chat. |
|
|
|
About WasabiWallet, OP's concern is "taint". Wasabi's developers make sure that all UTXOs that enter their pool don't come from questionable sources. They merely want to protect their users from taint.
Except that there is no central list of 'what is tainted' and what's not, so even a 'clean' output by Wasabi's standards might be rejected from an exchange. That's what I was asking franky1, "what watch list"? He's always there and invents something to disinform, and gaslight people, especially newbies. It could be true that clean outputs from WasabiWallet might be rejected, but its blocking of outputs that were used in "illegal transactions" could protect its CoinJoin pool from sanctions.
Heck, some exchanges could flag a UTXO, exactly because it comes from a (Wasabi or otherwise) CoinJoin and thus is not trivially linkable to a real-world identity.
Exchanges can do anything they need to do to protect themselves from sanctions, but my debate is merely either you accept the trade off and mix through Wasabi, or you don't. I'm not debating whether nopara37 did the right decision or not. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
