For PvP games, maybe cockfighting or any similar animals vs animals would be up to your liking? Cockfighting was super popular among SEA like the Philippines, Vietnam, and also China as well. I saw Latin America also have taste for this kind of PvP between animals. Tho, it's hard to see a fair game without 'fixed' in those games on online gambling sites.

although I never studied psychology but it seems this is true, I have a friend who is addicted to gambling, he doesn't care about his losing money, he only cares about winning bets when he is in a losing position. Gambling addiction is a serious problem, it needs special treatment from psychiatrists to change gambling addicts.

It is difficult to say the true value of bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, because everything is very dependent on the community, as long as there is stock and demand it determines the value of bitcoin, and we are happy because the bitcoin community continues to increase so that demand also increases.

It depends on the gambler most of the rich people manage their money properly and know what they afford to lose in the gambling we know they are capable of doing it because they have a large number of it. Some of the gambling addicted already make a win and they want to try it again and some of them are already lost a lot of money and want to earn it back. We know how gambling makes a risk. It's all about high-risk rewards depending on the luck and players' strategy.

I get your point and I understand what you are trying to say. However, I hope Wasabi will lose their customer base and people will switch to other services, which won't cooperate with blockchain analysis firms of their own free will. Let them turn into a service for institutional investors if they want, who cares.

And we're telling you, a page now, that what you're describing is oxymoron. On the one hand, they want to obfuscate their outputs so they can hide their purchases from their wives and employers. On the other, they'll deposit their coins to centralized exchanges, because... They're clueless?

Anything that you post is fair game, whether you believe it to be trivial or not.


Fair enough.  I won't argue with that.  

Well, yeah.  It does seem that the proclamations about bitcoin going to zero are seen way less regularly, and perhaps it is becoming much more difficult to either believe those kinds of projections or to even figure out ways to say such a thing without looking like a total nutjob.

I do believe one of the better ways of denigrating bitcoin does end up being when bitcoin is not differentiated from the many retarded, scam, smoke & mirror, "crypto projects out there.. not sure if there is any need to name the so many variations of such deceptive projects and the ways that bitcoin is lumped in with that crap - while at the same time, there is some truth to the various claims that bitcoin had enabled (and maybe even continues to enable in some indirect ways) the abilities to carry out so many ways to lull people into not really necessarily knowing the differences, but then even perhaps getting invested in some kind of way.. mentally or financially into the so many ways that technology is adapting in the real world.

Regarding bitcoin, for sure in the past couple of years, if not longer, with the exception of March 2020, there have been quite a few struggles to even get the BTC price down to the 100-week moving average, and currently that 100-week moving average price is nearly up to $35k, and even in June/July 2021 when we got down to $28,600, the 100-week moving average was at about $20k, so surely the 100-week moving average has continued to hold up pretty well in the past couple of years, and perhaps it had not really been breached since March/April 2020 when it was at about $7,200 at that time.

You can see the historical 100-week moving average prices here.

I am not saying that the 100-week moving average might not end up breaking, and surely we seem to be getting quite close to it - because it continues to slowly move up to higher prices, yet I would not be putting any kind of meaningful value in terms of either believing that it has to be met - even though we surely do continue to have a lot of worrying macro-events ongoingly taking place as well as the seeming precariousness of the juggling of various fiat systems (possibly better known as bubbles?).

I continue to argue that the 100-week moving average tends to serve as a bottom price for corrections during a bull market, and perhaps the fact that the 100-week moving average has not really been preached for nearly 3 years (absent the short-lived March 2020 liquidity event) supports the theory that we have been in an ongoing bull market since 2019... while at the same time, the use of those kinds of longer term moving averages, such as the 100-WMA.. does end up serving as a lagging indicator to tell us where we have been rather than where we might be going, so in that regard, if the 100-week moving average ends up getting breached for a decent amount of time, then we might be able to proclaim that the bull market may well be over and we are in a bear market - for however long that new status of a bear market might end up lasting.

So, then the 200-week moving average becomes the likely extreme bottom for when we end up being in a bear market, and currently the 200-week moving average is just moving above $21,500.  

You can see the historical 200-week moving average prices here.

For sure since early 2021, there have been quite a few folks proclaiming that bitcoin has to get some kind of a correction back down to the 200-week moving average, and holy shit.. the 200-week moving average has more than doubled in the time that those proclamations have been being made..

Even though quite a few more finanancialization tools have been introduced into bitcoin (including but not limited to futures/options products) that have been allowing for the naked shorting of bitcoin, so there is likely some truth to the matter that some of those tools can be effective in keeping bitcoin prices down.

Historically, those same kinds of tools have been successful in keeping PM prices down ( such as gold), while at the same time, bitcoin is a different kind of asset than PMs such as gold in terms of the ability to easily claim possession and to verify it without expensive third-party processes.. so in that regard, some of the bitcoin shorters and those who do not have the bitcoin that they proclaim to have (or that they are using in their various bets) may well get caught with their pants down in terms of their inabilities to cover the value of the coins that they are betting as if they had them.. which are ultimately client coins.,. but if they do not have them to give to clients, then there could end up being some pretty BIG wreckenings that are not are not really resolvable.. and maybe even some of the institutions/governments might not be ready, willing or able to cover those kinds of games that rich folks believe that they can get away with largely based on the fact that they have been getting away with that kind of fuckery for a decently long time.. ... so surely who knows if such wreckening scenarios will end up playing out or not.. even though I personally believe that there continues to be greater dangers in bitcoin than in other asset classes for the rich and/or even governments to be fucking around with trying to hold bitcoin prices down through those kinds of financial instruments (or even new variations) that have worked for them historically.

I suppose that my punchline is merely just to watch one stage at a time and perhaps there continues to be some questions about whether the 100-week moving average is going to be breached.. and if it is breached, does that 100-week moving average start to serve as resistance (rather than support) which largely would just mean if the BTC price were to be able to stay below the 100-week moving average for any kind of meaningful length of time beyond a few weeks, that is if it even were to get there.  I have my doubts, but I don't want to be caught off guard in terms of presuming too much regarding where the BTC price might go and how long it might stay there.

I never heard of any bull vs bear games on binance. Are you talking about the Leveraged Tokens: BULL, BEAR, ETHBULL & ETHBEAR on binance?
Those are actually not games but are Leveraged Tokens which can be traded on the exchange. If there is bull/bear game at binance, then i woud also like to know more about it.

That is also good maybe something like what is on the Binance app the bulls vs bears games where they will find you a match against other users and whoever lose the game they can get the other players bet. I think that was a good game too.

No one knows the future and that participation of theirs did really paid off specially to those people who do still manage to keep their keys for a very long time or lets say a decade time.

Using up LN isnt really that complicated just like on what that guy above telling about that manner. It is really just that people had been having that hindrance due to possible bugs and issues with LN.

Yes, recognition is less but wont be surprised that one day it would really be recognized for such switch of.

Up until now, you can only count the casinos which are deploying the LN.
Maybe, the demand is not that significant for them to integrate this network.
Also, they won't earn from the fees in case they will include this as the fees are very minimal in LN.
Some casinos are already earning from the fees alone. And most users are still preferring the regular btc network.
Since they are used to the native network, some are hesitant to use LN because they feel they don't know how to use it.

It seems to me that merely investing in bitcoin, you could end up doing or motivated partially by all three simultaneously...

that is trading

investing

and

engaging in a revolution



Of course, there are many of us including but not limited to yours truly and likely you too Wind_FURY who tend to want to think about bitcoin as an investment and a long term investment.

Surely, you and I have some disagreements regarding how much emphasis to give to buying on the dips versus engaging in a kind of pure DCA - and I am not really opposed to attempting to do both, even though you Wind_FURY seem to believe that bitcoin investors should attempt to understand their investment sufficiently enough in order to be able to identify when dips are happening and to attempt to take advantage of such dips in order to be able to both acquire more BTC on the dip but not to spend as much of their fiat prior to when the dip occurs.

It seem to me that the engaging in a revolution part does not necessarily need to be present from the start or even a sole motivation, but it could be part of the motivation to be into bitcoin and maybe even part of the reason to hold a larger amount of investment into bitcoin because there is a belief that bitcoin is changing the world in meaningful ways.  When I talk to newbies about bitcoin, I don't necessarily start with talks regarding how bitcoin is a revolution, but sometimes the conversation will go in that direction. .and at the same time, I do believe that a lot of folks could establish quite strong investment theses into bitcoin without even necessarily believing that bitcoin is a revolution - even though it does kind of seem that the more deeply anyone attempts to understand and appreciate bitcoin's contribution to society, there is going to be some likely increased understanding regarding bitcoin's revolutionary angle.

Actually another thing about the revolutionary angle is that when you really start to understand the power of bitcoin and the fact that it was designed in such a way to be able to be somewhat resilient to attacks from state actors and even powerful private actors, there is a kind of "holy shit" appreciation in regards to the power of that kind of system and amazement in regards to the fact that anything like that could really be designed, and perhaps part of the lack of understanding that so many normies no coiners have in regards to bitcoin remains their skepticism in regards to believing that governments are more powerful than they are in terms of being able to control (or even stop) bitcoin if they were to not want bitcoin, so that angle that challenges so many perceptions (and conceptions) regarding how the world works remains something that is so hard to wrap our heads around.. even if we have been in bitcoin for a long time, many of us continue to have doubts in regards towards bitcoin's various resiliencies that are somewhat embedded into its already genius design... and also a lot of luck that so many of the basic design components have not been undermined in any kind of meaningful nor substantial way that would cause bitcoin to lose its resiliency angle within its design and how it operates every 10 minutes producing another block and no one can stop it.. hahahahaha  that's powerful.

Wives and employers won't be able to follow the trail from the source to what was purchased. They also can't acquire this information by asking Wasabi or blockchain analysis firms. Analysis companies feed their data to government institutions and other 3rd parties. It remains private in a way that the wife and employer won't be told about it.    

I also think that bigger players can manipulate the market because they already seeing the market direction through the charts and they can hodl longer from selling or buying until the small traders get exhausted in the market getting RSI hodl overbought a longtime without reversal. Banks are capable of doing the manipulation as they have plenty money to lock around the market.

That's why investing must have knowledge, traders usually have a way of seeing good conditions in starting to invest, and many ways to make crypto money, but these ways don't look easy to people who don't know how to do it, because there are too many things to consider, so that the trading that is done really gives a positive value from the investment that was started

The community should return to reality. Elon Musk made a margin loan of $12.5 billion to buy Twitter. He used $62.5 billion of stocks of Tesla as collateral for this. It is speculated that if Tesla dumps by 43%, Elon will have a margin call. This -43% dump is when the price of Tesla stock is $571.

The American economy, similar to other countries' economies, might enter a recession. $571 per Tesla stock is very much a possbility if we enter a recession. What do companies do if they take risk and needs more liquidity? They sell assets. What is one of the easiest assets to sell that Tesla owns in their treasury?



Assuming a starting value of $1,000 per share, the margin call comes at a share price of $571, at which point Musk would have to find $2.6 billion to lower the outstanding amount of the loan and bring the loan to value ratio down to the reset level. This could force the sale of some of Musk’s Tesla shares, putting downward pressure on the share price and lowering the collateral value further.

Source https://seekingalpha.com/article/4503494-tesla-stock-as-collateral-to-buy-twitter-avoid-buy-the-dip



Also, there were articles that Michael Saylor has also made loans against Microstrategy's bitcoin as the collateral.

It is not easy to see black swans ...

It is even more difficult to react quickly and take the right actions (adequate in the current situation).  First of all, you need to be observant.  A classic example of a Black Swan is a tsunami.  How can a tsunami be predicted?  Before the wave destroys the coastal city, the coastal seabed will be completely exposed.  First, the sea leaves, and then a tsunami arises.  The "Black Swan" is preceded by strange unusual events.  If you see something that has never been before, then the Black Swan is coming soon.  

However, it is not easy to make money on the Black Swan, because the standard causal relationships (built according to the old patterns) do not work in the Black Swan situation.  But if you were able to foresee the onset of the Black Swan, then it makes sense to act outside the box, this increases the chance of winning.  

At its core, the Black Swan is an event that breaks the balance.  There are strong vibrations in the system.

Nassim Taleb used a certain psychological nuance.  People perceive unlikely events as an event that will never happen (this is how human psychology works).  But it's not.  An event with low probability is a probable event.  Such events happen quite often.  

Bets on events with a low probability involve the use of high odds when paying out winnings.  A big win can pay off all previously made bets.  

Psychologically, people prefer to avoid losing. They are more afraid of losing than they want to win.  

In his books, Nassim Taleb suggested actively looking for Black Swans.  This game strategy is not a passive strategy - it is an active game strategy.