Cada vez que se toca el tema de la destrucción de empleo por la IA no puedo evitar recordar la imagen de trabajadores rompiendo máquinas allá por el s.XIX de mi libro de ciencias sociales del colegio. Se trataba del ludismo, para quienes no conocieran el fenómeno (somos gente bien educada, pero quizá alguien más joven que lea nuestros posts desconozca esto y le venga bien la referencia).

Sobre el futuro, aunque soy persona de aventurarse en vívidas visiones, en este caso a falta de más información o de ver cómo se irán desarrollando los acontecimientos, en mi cabeza solo hay una gran ?. Ya veremos si esto no es para tanto, si las máquinas nos liberan del trabajo y nos permiten vivir en la feliz despreocupación de que hablaran los filósofos de la polis griega y nos da tiempo a cambiar el rumbo de destrucción del planeta que llevamos, o si acabará una gran parte de la población en la miseria, con el correspondiente riesgo de guerra.

I wouldn't go so far.

If I'm not wrong, skills count in Poker as much as 80%, and chance the remaining 20%. If a player had to compete against the machine, with no help, I don't think anyone would be able to calculate the probabilities in such a way to defeat the AI in the long term.

For games like chess where skill counts 100%, the probability for any human being to win taking into account the state of the art is zero, regardless his skill. With poker it is not zero because of the randomness you mentioned, but I still think that chances to win would be reduced dramatically.

Unless protocols like the ones mentioned by 3kpk3 can be successfully implemented, I think that AI can pose a threat for poker online in the way we know it.

Yes, if you removed one, others would benefit from it, what what I meant is that, if i'm not wrong, the dominance of Binance is over 80% of the CEX market. I have nothing against Binance, but against concentrating so much power in only one service provider, specially when Bitcoin was meant to be used for peer-to-peer transactions, and not to create the opportunity for one new big "bank" like CZ's.




I totally agree with you in all these points and couldn't have explained it better.

Some members said that they wouldn't change a thing from this crypto-sphere we live in, but IMO there are a lot of things that should be changed and a huge room to improve.

If I had to choose one, maybe the market dominance of Binance would be the one that I would choose as per today. It is dangerous when a monopoly like that dominates in such a degree a certain market, and in my understanding of the underlying values in the creation of Bitcoin, I think that it goes against Satoshi's vision.

Are you creating the "Alliance of Bitcointalk Gamblers"? (AoBG)

As others said, if your intentions are good and you don't escalate this idea and end up asking for money to those interested on it, then I hope you good luck. As some important member in this forum told me one day: I respect those who want to create something out of nothing.

As a little piece of advice, maybe you could write in bold the most important sentence(s) in your OP, so those members in a hurry can get the main idea before skipping to the next thread. Because it is quite large and without format (a brick).

Aunque en un principio me mostré reacio a añadir este ANN a la lista de traducciones benéficas de AoBT, parece que el proyecto es de interés general en el foro y, tras haber sido traducido por varios miembros de la Alianza de traductores y la propuesta formal de uno de ellos, será traducido en varias secciones locales.

Mi enhorabuena a AgoraDesk y LocalMonero por el proyecto, y agradecimiento y felicitaciones a d5000 por el buen trabajo.

In fact, our main goal is not to "translate services", but the most interesting and educational topics into our languages, so people who wouldn't read about them into English because of the language barrier can learn about them too. You can take a look into our List of translations and you'll see what I'm talking about.

So I think that you are talking about services like AgoraDesk (which I personally voted against translating, but our team is democratic so I don't make the decisions here) is the exception, not the rule. I hope this answer makes you change your mind about the point of our alliance.


cygan explained it much briefly and better than me


Please, come back whenever you want because the insight of veteran members like you is always helpful. But, please, understand that our goal is not to support projects like Unijoin, AgoraDesk or whatever. With all my respect, I think that trees are preventing you from seeing the forest in this particular occasion.

Dear Ratimov, I would like to know what translators you are talking about specifically, because as far as I know many of us are not only translating these topics (100% by hand, at least in my case, and I'd swear that I'm not the only one), but answering the questions the members of our local boards have about them too, and also keeping them alive while the interest on the topic lasts.

Instead of criticize us all in a generic way, I genuinely think that it would be much more helpful to give a wake-up call to these translators you found to be making things wrong.

As long as they require it for deposits, it is not so bad (well, they already got some personal info as email address and IP when you registered, but you don't get your money trapped if you didn't want to share your ID card or Passport). It has happened a few times to me: deposit some coins somewhere, swap or trade, and before withdrawing: Wait! you have to fulfil KYC

Now I always read the ToS before using services like these, but most people don't, and I suppose that there is a big business here: all these coins from people who value their privacy more than the value of the coins (not to talk about stained money in the most nefarious cases when criminals deposited funds and got trapped) must be worth millions. But it is an unethical practice, to say the least.

Better check the characters in the middle of the address, as the first and last characters are the most easy to tamper and the ones we are most used to check. For relatively large amounts, it's worth the little effort to check every single character, just in case (a few seconds can save you hours/days/years of regret).

---

I think this is the kind of OP we should read more often in this section. Although it is basic information, well-known for most of us, the insight is important for beginners and the post is short, easy to read, and goes straight to the point before giving an example. Thank you and congratulations Ruttoshi.

Bienvenido al foro MateoDiaz. Tu manera de escribir me suena, pero quizá me equivoque

Supongo que sin más datos, solo podemos especular. Puede que simplemente se deba a una reestructuración automatizada por razones de eficiencia. Quizá planeen vender una parte y hayan separado dicha porción para la venta, o que ya hayan vendido y por eso haya menos wallets con más de 100 BTC, vaya, que estén más repartidos.

De todos modos, un lapso de tiempo de 4 meses tampoco me parece significativo. Si me dijeras que ha alcanzado su punto más bajo de la historia de Bitcoin quizá pudiéramos hacer más lecturas, pero tratándose de un cuatrimestre no le daría tampoco mucha más vuelta.

Dear LUCKMCFLY, although I don't fully share your point of view, I can understand your feelings. But part of the problem is that most people don't deal with cryptos and they wouldn't agree to make them tax free, so the utopia you are proposing is just that, a utopia.

I would settle for clear and reasonable rules on how to pay taxes. If I earn money, I have no problem in sharing a part for the common good. The problem is that nowadays in many countries we haven't got clear rules, and the ones we could invent by analogy don't fit well with the extreme volatility of this market, because they were not created with it in mind.

Although I never give financial advice, I would advise to be more cautious and invest just a little bit at a time.

Allocating a percentage like the one proposed by the OP of your entire wealth to something you don't understand isn't reasonable, independently on what the investment is about (sorry dear Bitcoin ).

I think it is much better to buy little by little, learn about cryptos while, at the same time, you can "touch" them in a metaphorical sense, so they doesn't remain as abstract and cold concepts in your mind while you learn, and increase the risk gradually, if ever (maybe one day you decide that you don't like cryptos anymore).

Maybe the OP (and those who agreed with him before) are starting to feel the FOMO?

Anyway, each case is unique and different situations deserve a different decision making, of course. But don't forget to look at investing in cryptos as gambling somehow, more than what we traditionally mean by investing.

Is ETH mining still a thing? forgive me if I'm wrong, but afaik ETH became POS long time ago and mining is not possible anymore. On the other hand, your comment about mining Bitcoin with a GPU doesn't seem too accurate either (you "don't think" it will be profitable, or it is ages since it is clearly not profitable?).

I don't want to sound rude, I encourage the participation of new members even if they don't know too much about the topics (to participate is a way to learn), but in topics like mining, which I don't control either, we should let other members in this forum, who are real experts on such matter, answer.


That's a good point, however although a little luxury for those specs.

True. Sports betting could be based on skill to some degree, if betting platforms didn't fix the odds, but for many people it is more confortable to rely on that false sense of control. Not the case of the "Quiniela" in my country, for example (with different names around the worl), where you guess the results of the 15 games of the week and become a millionaire, some sort of lottery on the other hand, as it is still easier to be hit by a lightning, although skill can play a little role.

But with odds, all the knowledge about sports and a certain game is already concentrated there: one should be humble enough to acknowledge that his skill is not much better than the experts' and, of course, than the algorithm.

A mí también me vienen alguna vez a la memoria escenas parecidas de la película. En un futuro intermedio, entre idílico y apocalíptico, tendríamos este escenario en el que la máquina nos liberaría de la obligación de trabajar, sin que la inmensa mayoría de la población esté psicológicamente preparada para tal ociosidad (un poco como al que le toca la lotería sin tener una educación financiera básica, y acaba arruinado o peor).

Pero son más recurrentes, quizá porque desde los medios nos transmiten ese miedo, escenas del tipo 2001:..., Terminator o Matrix. No hemos hablado de regulaciones, que ya van tarde y seguramente mal (es difícil regular algo que no se entiende, lo vimos con el Bitcoin), pero si el ser humano no es capaz de autocontrolarse, no quedará otra que fijar unos límites legales, aprovechando que, de momento, no le hemos cedido la potestad legislativa a la IA (que todo se andará: otro escenario distópico en qué pensar).

Although this is macro, I think that in this case we could make an analogy with the microeconomic cases of many households and extremely simplify the reasons. With all the differences, if we can think about a family with 150k in savings or investments and a credit of 100k, why is it so hard to understand when the subjects are countries instead?

As others said, paying means a cost of opportunity: would it be a good idea if that family liquidated their investments (a house in rental, for example) to pay the debt? or losing their savings when we all should know that fungibility is valuable? Nobody wants to be rescued if they can avoid it.

There are a lot of differences between both cases (particular debt vs national debt), but the example above can help to easily understand what at first sight seems counterintuitive.

La que se nos va a venir (nos está viniendo) encima es tremenda. Por un lado lo que comentáis sobre la veracidad del contenido: si ya no te podías fiar de lo que ves con tus propios ojos (las imágenes y vídeos ya eran fácilmente retocables), la facilidad con la que se puede manipular el mismo y el nivel de detalle que está logrando la IA es como para replantearse muchos hábitos digitales adquiridos. Ahora más que nunca debe primar el pensamiento crítico, sobre todo en la atención a las fuentes, algo a lo que la mayoría no estamos muy acostumbrados.

Como anécdota, el otro día me sorprendió ver en una plataforma de streaming de referencia un nuevo programa en el que se muestra a concursantes vídeos de sus parejas siéndoles infieles, y tienen que adivinar si son fake o no. Vamos, que esta tecnología se puede convertir en un verdadero trampolín para las miserias de la humanidad.

En cuanto a las profesiones y puestos de trabajo que quedarán obsoletos, todo lo que nos han vendido en la última década (algo más) sobre los empleados del conocimiento puede dar un giro completo. Ya no solo traductores (que sin IA ya veíamos peligrar el tema) sino lo que comenta DPD sobre el doblaje, y como se veía en el reality de las infidelidades sobre la propia imagen. Lo de la novela automática no es nada comparado con las películas que te puede montar con poco esfuerzo. Y temas más artísticos ya ni te cuento: le dices dibújame un dragón, y ahí lo tienes, al momento, para desesperación de ilustradores. La casuística parece casi infinita.

Tiene su lado positivo también: comentaba ayer una científica que en el laboratorio determinados procesos que antes se tardaba meses en finalizar, ahora al parecer puede durar minutos (y no uno sino 1.000 procesos). Claro que todo depende de cómo se use esta capacidad. Ahora más que nunca queda patente la importancia de la inteligencia emocional y, por qué no decirlo, de la ética, la filosofía y, perdón por repetirme, el pensamiento crítico.

Past are the days when you could earn some money giving away minimum to no personal details. One of my first activities with cryptos was taking part in the airdrop of Decred, several years ago. I think that we were around 3,000 people registered, and we were airdropped more than 1,000$ in exchange. Of course, I was a newbie and sold too early (price went nuts in the 2017 ATH and regretted my impatience) but, compared to "modern" airdrops (to call them in some way), it still was a great deal.

Now we can say that if it seems too good to be true, it is almost certainly a scam. Edit: if not backed by giant service providers like Gladitorcomeback just mentioned.

On the contraty, I think that what the OP (correct me if I'm wrong) meant is that no KYC is not a safe practice for them (gambling platforms).

I think that it will depend on the jurisdiction they are licensed in, on one hand, and the citizenship of the players, on the other hand. If I'm not wrong, legislations among countries differ so much that there must be many exceptions to mandatory KYC. But I'm not any expert, it is just my perception.