I'm with you on this. I also don't like children to be burdened about this Bitcoin thing. Let them hear it when you discuss it with family and friends. Let them get curious about it when they see the logo everywhere. Let them ask questions about it when they hear it mentioned on TV or in a movie or series. But don't try to impose it on them as if it is some kind of a survival thing.

At the end of the day, there are a million other things that matter a lot more to these children than Bitcoin.

I'm a bit curious about your country's crypto stand. It has banned Bitcoin. It was more or less a blanket ban, right? It doesn't only cover banks and other financial institutions, it includes all businesses. And not only businesses, it even also includes individuals. So Bitcoin transactions are prohibited for everyone. The government even threated jail time to offenders to show how strict they are.

And yet Bitcoin can be accessed easily. I even heard of businesses like a coffee shop and a clothing store accepting Bitcoin payments. And here you are also saying a friend is operating a crypto platform. I wonder whether the ban was merely pure talk and there was really no effort to crack down on violators.

This may be the overall intention of many of us here, but the problem is that sometimes you can't tell which one is legit and which one is a scam. If it is already proven as scam, it is easy to avoid. But if it is a new project, who can tell? As a matter of fact, who does a deep research? Some people may do a little background checking and find nothing alarming, perhaps even with some red flags. Even popular managers here have probably promoted a scam or two.

Poverty isn't the lack of money. I agree, poverty is failing to meet one's needs. And to meet one's needs, one doesn't have to have money. As a matter of fact, there are so many place where I've been where people don't have much money, but they have all the things that they basically need. They have a decent house, abundant nutritious food, decent clothing, and so on. But what they don't have are modern technologies. They don't have air conditioners, smart televisions, laptop, microwave oven, refrigerators, and so forth. But I don't consider them poor.

I think the first thing that you need is familiarity with the sports, and then the stats, the players, their games, their strengths and weaknesses, and so on. It's even better if you are playing the sport itself. In that way, you can somehow relate with the game.

Another thing I guess is a bit of intelligence when it comes to looking for certain patterns and tendencies, a little of math in analyzing numbers, and probably a strong memory to take into consideration the players and the teams' previous performances.

And then, of course, there are those basic dos and don'ts in gambling.

You said that your business is having some difficulties right now. There are less customers, low sales. Rent has now become a challenge for you. And now you're even taking a share of your profit to "earn money by investing in Bitcoin." You might want to do some math about this. Money invested in Bitcoin might mean money taken away from your business. Bitcoin won't give you a daily or monthly profit, so your Bitcoin investment might actually mean even less capital for your business.

Anyway, I assume you're from Bangladesh. I have always been curious about how strict your government's implementation of the ban against Bitcoin. It seems there are still businesses accepting it as payment.

I think those people who truly understand Bitcoin and see its potential aren't a bit bothered with all the drama. The SEC and the government in general can stop Binance. They can stop Coinbase. They can order the arrest of all the CEOs of these top platforms. They can kick out all the miners. They can kill the whole crypto industry in the country.

But what they can't shut down is Bitcoin. They can't censor it. They can't tamper the data. They can't do anything with it. At best, they can make it difficult for people to have access.

This will all have an effect to its price, though. So if, for you, Bitcoin's price is all there is to it, then you might be troubled.

There are actually a number of licensed Bitcoin-related platforms in the country. I remember I used to have an account on BuyBitcoin.ph. There was another one I cannot recall anymore. Those where the good old days when Coins.ph and Abra were the main players.

Today, there are many of them. The mainstream GCash and PayMaya already integrated crypto on their platforms. Pouch and Strike are also here offering Lightning payments. There is also a new platform here which offers OTC crypto transactions. My bad, I also cannot remember the name. But they have numerous partners all over the country.

Banks are also gradually opening their doors.

Overall, it seems we're doing good.


In a way, it is an indicator. It could mean that there is a market significant enough to be exploited, worth risking for, despite the challenges. I'm not necessarily speaking of my country, though.


On this basis, the growth is at least considerable. As a matter of fact, there is an ongoing effort to continue building what is named as the Bitcoin Island. It's an effort to drive the adoption of Bitcoin as a currency. So far, the number of merchants accepting Bitcoin, even through the Lightning network, is growing.

I'm not sure if security measures is to be listed under pros of centralized exchanges. I think it should fall under cons. After all, it is certainly one of the main reasons why user funds are lost. Many centralized exchanges fail to secure their users' funds and personal information. Billions are lost due to hacks and other security breaches.

If one is to protect his/her funds, security measures of centralized exchanges aren't an added layer of protection. On the contrary, the moment one sends his/her funds to a centralized exchange, security is gone.

I'm afraid this isn't a state sovereignty issue in that the constitution itself prohibits it. The constitution, being the highest law of the country, overpowers any state law. Even federal laws will have to abide by the constitution. In the first place, state sovereignty is not absolute. They're free within structures.

When the constitution was authored is immaterial. If there are certain provisions that won't fit or aren't anymore applicable to the modern world, it can be amended. Until then, it remains as the supreme law.


Probably not. I assume those specific letters in the constitution aren't literal.

However, I'm curious: is a digital currency backed by gold valid considering that the constitution exempts gold and silver in its prohibition of states to issue their own currency?

For me, there's no debate on the issue. Buying real estate is always better than renting. I can list my own reasons. First off, it will be yours. That you won't be renting forever is enough reason for me to favor buying your own house.

I was actually happy when I read the book The Richest Man in Babylon and found out that one of the tips mentioned was to "own your home." I couldn't agree more.

You can renovate it freely, adjust the design later on according to your own taste and needs, use it as a collateral for a loan, sell it, and so on. You can do whatever you want with it. It is frustrating to always defer to your landlord on all decisions about the place you're living in.

Moreover, with inflation, what you will be paying in the years to come for your own house will actually be worth less.

Betting on a huge underdog and simply hoping for an upset which you yourself don't even know how to happen or where to come from is like betting on luck. That's not going to be profitable. Betting on an underdog because of a distinct analysis could be reasonable. Betting on the huge underdog Miami heat, for example, versus the most favorite team to win the NBA championship, Boston Celtics, could have some reasonable bases. This could turn out profitable.

Although this may seem a much nicer idea than a CBDC, will the federal laws allow states to create their own currencies?

I did a quick research on Google whether there are laws pertaining to this. I found out that it may even be unconstitutional. The constitution itself prohibits this. Section 10 of the constitution "denies states the right to coin or to print their own money."^[1] I presume this prohibition extends to digital currencies. The country will only have a single national currency.

---

[1] http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/essays/general/a-brief-history-of-central-banking/money-and-the-constitution.php

I have never been addicted to gambling even though I like and enjoy it. And I guess I have enough self-discipline that I'm confident in saying, I'm never going that road.

To those who are already addicted, I guess a group effort is somehow needed to get them out of it. It's hard to expect that gambling addicts themselves will initiate their own rehabilitation, so family, friends, loved ones, workmates, and whoever is around them, even the casinos themselves, should perhaps also take a little share of responsibility.

Aside from the effort to seek professional intervention, other seemingly small yet significant efforts like inviting the gambler to another hobby, or visiting him to take away some of his/her idle hours, or other efforts to simply distract him/her from gambling will definitely be of help.

I don't quite understand your point. How is Bitcoin worse than fiat in terms of inflation rate, or the effects thereof?

In 2011, what can you buy with 1 dollar? Fast forward to 2023, can you say that you will have to pay $10 in order to buy that same thing? Probably not? But supposing the prices have multiplied 10 times, Bitcoin's growth not only kept up, it greatly surpassed the rate of inflation. If from 2011 to 2023 the prices of goods rose to as high as x10, the price of Bitcoin grew more than x1000. How, then, can Bitcoin be worse than fiat when while fiat's purchasing power weakened Bitcoin's increased?

As far as "chain-inflation" is concerned, Bitcoin forks aren't Bitcoin.

There is nothing much to think about this. The problem with Binance is that they are kind of sneaky. They want to operate in a country without going through the process. They want to make money out of the market of a country without securing a license. Without being registered, it means Binance isn't paying any taxes. But the point is really simple. Without a license, it is operating illegally. So once the authorities know about this, they will surely make them stop whatever it is they are doing.

I would like to know where you're trying to get at or what you are trying to point out. Rather than asking us whether this would work or not, can you please tell us why should this work?

What then if we have two different currencies, one with a considerably higher inflation rate than the other? Should it necessarily mean the negative effects of inflation will be addressed?

And if we use the formula (A+B)/2 for the prices of goods and services, would it not defeat the purpose of providing two different currencies for the two different economic classes? And what will happen to supply and demand?

Well, that's probably it. An attack on Binance is not an attack on Bitcoin. As KingsDen clearly spelled out, Binance is not Bitcoin. If I may add, Binance is a business entity solely created to make money. That's it.

Binance has been the subject of so many attacks through the years, some successful, some not. But all of them are never really directed at Bitcoin. So they all don't really matter. Just as Mt. Gox, Cryptopia, FTX, and many other centralized exchanges vanished while Bitcoin continued to remain alive, Binance could also die anytime and Bitcoin will stay on.

This isn't a breaking argument for Nassim Taleb. This isn't new. This has been repeated over and over again, not by Bitcoin critics but by Bitcoin advocates themselves. So Nassim Taleb is not scoring a point against Bitcoin with this.

As a matter of fact, on the contrary, this is a point for Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a technology which offers transparency in the world of finance. The more reason, therefore, that it should be the preferred currency. In the age of severe corruption happening around the world, Bitcoin offers a great solution. At a time when fiat manipulation and questionable money printing is an issue, Bitcoin is the answer. With Bitcoin, everybody can do his/her verification.

And this is probably one of the reasons why so many politicians are against Bitcoin; because they are thieves.

I guess we all are guilty of this. It has happened to me countless of times. This is quite normal for us gamblers, I would even say. But I'm not referring to those who gamble only once in a blue moon.

I think what will prevent me from not being true to my word is to be really busy about something else. I think I need a good distraction, something that will take my focus away from gambling or betting or even from the sports or sports leagues that I usually bet on. Traveling, hiking, biking, and other hobbies could do that.

Another thing is peer pressure. That's a hard thing to resist. Sometimes I am convinced against my will to gamble because of my friends.