Last update: 2026-05-05_Tue_21.18h (Amsterdam time)
Change your preferences in LoyceV's notification bot.
See Notifications for others.
Darker45 receives Notifications when he's quoted or mentioned
Ignore list:
Posts from these users are ignored:
1. Darker45
Posts in these topics are ignored:
none
Username "Darker45" occurred in the following posts (quoted and/or mentioned):
1. Post 66692519 (unedited backup) (by icebar) (scraped on Tue May 5 21:12:13 CEST 2026) in How long would you stay before gambling?:
Of course. The longer you stay in the casino, the more you're hooked on it, and the harder it would be to leave. I think it would be best to set a definite length of time when gambling rather than keep it open.
The risk isn't that you'd be having so much fun you'd completely forget about the time; it's that you'd continue gambling despite not enjoying it anymore. There are many gamblers who aren't excited anymore, already bored, but continue on betting, can't seem to detach themselves from it even if it's supposed to be over.
I don't think there is measurements of time space that should be given to know when to gamble or not. Every time spent in gambling is precious if properly analys. It can be utilized into something more valuable and valuable than gambling.
The more time spent on gambling makes up for addiction, as the frequent patronage in the gambling sites makes one more involved in gambling. It good to gamble occasionally and without any emotional attachment with self control.
When a gambler spends more time on gambling uncontrollably, his chances of addiction will increase to a great extent. If he spends more time on gambling, on the one hand, he will face financial losses, on the other hand, a large part of his time will be wasted. The gambler will suffer losses from both sides. Due to excessive gambling, the amount of losses of the gambler will continue to increase. But if he tries to control his gambling. If he gambles within his capacity, then even if he loses in gambling, that amount will be within the tolerance level. There is definitely a big chance of addiction with excessive gambling. While gambling, one should come back within a very short time so that he does not get addicted to gambling in any way. Although it will be difficult to control emotions at that time, but one should try.
2. Post 66692134 (unedited backup) (by Franklyn-wood) (scraped on Tue May 5 19:47:32 CEST 2026) in How long would you stay before gambling?:
Of course. The longer you stay in the casino, the more you're hooked on it, and the harder it would be to leave. I think it would be best to set a definite length of time when gambling rather than keep it open.
The risk isn't that you'd be having so much fun you'd completely forget about the time; it's that you'd continue gambling despite not enjoying it anymore. There are many gamblers who aren't excited anymore, already bored, but continue on betting, can't seem to detach themselves from it even if it's supposed to be over.
I don't think there is measurements of time space that should be given to know when to gamble or not. Every time spent in gambling is precious if properly analys. It can be utilized into something more valuable and valuable than gambling.
The more time spent on gambling makes up for addiction, as the frequent patronage in the gambling sites makes one more involved in gambling. It good to gamble occasionally and without any emotional attachment with self control.
3. Post 66691665 (unedited backup) (by Achalugo BTC) (scraped on Tue May 5 18:07:55 CEST 2026) in Organized religion and Gambling, moral or are people just against gambling.:
If I'm not mistaken, religions have different views on gambling. Some treat it as a tool of the devil, some not. From what I understand, some Christian religions don't even treat gambling as evil. What's evil is when you commit crimes, deprive others of their rights, and so on because of gambling.
In the end, however, it's not about religion. It's about whether gambling does good or bad to you, your family, or your life in general. But gambling can only do to you what you allow. That's the bottom-line.
Whatever thing one is doing, let it be done in moderation and not in excess because it will always lead from one problem to another, it doesn't matter whether its religion or not. But, one has to do it for their own safety and of their future, that is why its good for players to just have fun so that they won't have to injure themselves into doing things that will destroy their lives and just enjoy the game as it is and not to do otherwise.
4. Post 66685990 (unedited backup) (by Free Market Capitalist) (scraped on Mon May 4 05:37:37 CEST 2026) in [NEWS]Philippine Government Workers Now Barred From All Gambling, New CSC Policy:
Do you guys think this is too much? Just a reminder that these people are not Government officials, they are workers, so they don't hold power in the government like government officials do.
Yes, I think it is too much. It’s one thing that people with a conflict of interest aren’t allowed to gamble, but you can imagine how much harm it could do if a clerk in the public sector or someone who serves you at a counter went to the casino with friends over the weekend and placed a couple of bets.
If only this country doesn't stop at mere announcements of policies. For now, I'd take this with a pinch of salt. For one, this won't be properly implemented. At most, this will be implemented only against selected politicians or officials who aren't friends with the current administration. I'm more than sure this will only be used as a bullying tool by whoever is in power to persecute dissenters and oppositions.
Secondly, this is just a policy coming from a commission; this isn't backed with a law.
I'm not so sure about the claim that it won't be implemented. I don't know exactly how it will work in the Philippines, but a commission like that usually has regulatory authority, and if you look at the news article, it says:
The resolution will take effect 15 days after its publication in the Official Gazette or the newspaper.
5. Post 66684409 (unedited backup) (by lionheart78) (scraped on Sun May 3 19:49:38 CEST 2026) in What Does Bitcoin Mean to You (haikus only):
Legacy of coins
Is not how much you possess,
But how you spend them.
Uh-uh, not at all
It matters how much you have
Price keeps going up
Bitcoin to the Moon
And when it boom no one glooms
For all, it's a boon
This is very entertaining ..
Bitcoin, escape pod,
Think bitcoin, think open source,
My plan A, not B.
But for fiat fanatics
It is time to take Plan B
B as in Bitcoin
6. Post 66682944 (unedited backup) (by cryptomaniac_xxx) (scraped on Sun May 3 11:53:32 CEST 2026) in Spence vs Tszyu in Australia - July 26:
Although Spence is the favorite here, I'm thinking, with all other factors considered, that Tim could be worth the risk. Errol is old, hasn't been in the ring for 3 years, but rarely had fights in the past 5 years actually. And I remembered how he looked so easy against Crawford in his last fight despite the hype that the match was between 2 of the best fighters.
Tim isn't coming from a devastating defeat. I think he's recovered well after defeating Velazquez and Nurja. Spence, on the other hand, is. And it was a humiliating TKO. This must add to his ring rust. I hope he's in perfect shape, though.
What do you mean not damage good? Have you seen his fight against Fundora 2x and then to Bakhram Murtazaliev? It's was bloody and brutal. For that win against Velasquez and Nurja, it's obvious that it was cherry pick fight for him to regain back his confidence.
I agree with @mirakal - battle of losers and most likely trying to salvage their career. Shots fired already at the press conference and it looks like Spence has started trash talking already when all Tim said to him was all respectful.
7. Post 66682850 (unedited backup) (by Iranus) (scraped on Sun May 3 11:22:19 CEST 2026) in Rent over buying of house?:
It actually depends on your circumstances and preferences. But, yeah, mobility will be affected by having your own house. However, I don't see this as a big problem. You can always rent it if you want or have to move residence. You can also sell it if you don't have any plans on running it as a rented property or even moving back there in the foreseeable future.
In my opinion, whether or not to own a home depend largely on one’s financial situation. Most of us are hesitant between buying and renting because our financial situation does not allow us to own one or more homes. The other reasons are just excuses.
A house depreciates over time. Although it might grow in value in the short or medium term, it'll eventually be declared unsafe to live in the decades to come. Keeping it in perfect condition requires regular maintenance. That means it isn't just stagnant; it has a cost. But it generally depreciates. The piece of land on which it is built is generally appreciating, though.
So, owning a house is an important decision that not everybody has to make.
When you own a house, not an apartment, you own a property with the potential to appreciate. Real estate is an essential asset class, and its value only increases over time.
Although home maintenance can be costly, it is still much cheaper and more worthwhile than renting.
8. Post 66682195 (unedited backup) (by julerz12) (scraped on Sun May 3 05:37:49 CEST 2026) in Fun yet somewhat useful BTC Projects:
I tried to google them instead and I found some interesting stuff from various articles, but most of them seems to be dead now. A funny mempool explorer that replace block data with something funny, an imaginary blockchain that replace OP_RETURN and so on. I guess it's literally for fun and the devs just let them die after publishing it. I guess my definition is skewed towards funny instead of fun.
I tried that too (when I reached around the 12th page of the Service announcements board
) and found those similar dead projects. Shame though, it would be nice to see and try them.
I wonder if there's an April fool viewer that scrap the forum data and make a historical UI from that, that sounds interesting.
No idea. There are some archives on April 1 this year (and maybe a couple of years ago, too), but, I couldn't see the changes made in the forum, especially that green theme.
https://web.archive.org/web/20260000000000*/https://bitcointalk.org/Wow. A real-life crypto farming simulation. I'd love to imagine this project managed to continue and grow; the viewers could feed not just chickens but all sorts of farm animals.
I've come across "What if Bitcoin?", that's whatifbitcoin.org. It seems it falls exactly within the category of "fun yet somewhat useful". What makes it fun is the "what if" part. They have a 'what could have been' or 'regret' or 'missed opportunity' calculator. You can put the amount you could have invested, choose a specific date in the past, and find out how much Bitcoin you could have bought.
Furthermore, it tells you how much gaming rigs, Nvidia stocks, restaurant visits, car rentals, boat tours, among others you could have bought today with your investment.
When I tried it, I wasn't exactly thinking of what could have been because the amount I put was the amount I used to have. The regret wasn't about not buying but about buying but selling
tragically early. It's fun to sometimes look back and face your regrets.
But aside from the fun, the site is also educational.
It sounds like a site that could amplify someone's depression from selling their BTC early.
It's a fun site nonetheless.
I'd like to share this service:
https://home.txcity.ioIt's a nice way to compare TX between multiple blockchain and the number of transactions, where the blocks are likened to a bus and the transactions to objects waiting for this bus.
This is cool too. It's like a traffic jam monitoring service but for crypto.
9. Post 66679903 (unedited backup) (by sunsilk) (scraped on Sat May 2 15:57:25 CEST 2026) in What’s an acceptable wagering requirement for you on Casino Bonuses?:
Personally, I don't chase bonuses, and the main reason is that it seems offered but with a caveat that you won't make any money from it. But it's understandable. For somebody who'll spend a lot of time playing, however, it may be worth it. For me, it's a waste of time.
I don't chase bonuses as well and I know that I'll simply fall for the trap if I won't stop chasing them. And I bet whenever I want without the pressure of going with the bonuses.
It is true those who are gambling for a long time could have a lot of time to spare and money to chase for the bonus given with that.
But for a guy who casually gambles to have fun, it won't matter to them whatever is the wagering requirement because they won't even chase for it.
10. Post 66679575 (unedited backup) (by panjul07) (scraped on Sat May 2 14:17:20 CEST 2026) in What’s an acceptable wagering requirement for you on Casino Bonuses?:
Personally, I don't chase bonuses, and the main reason is that it seems offered but with a caveat that you won't make any money from it. But it's understandable. For somebody who'll spend a lot of time playing, however, it may be worth it. For me, it's a waste of time.
I also do not feel comfortable chasing bonuses in casinos but then since it is free money and something that a player is entitled to whenever they meet the condition, it is only fair that the condition be possible to meet and not become a share waste of time and energy. A considerate wagering requirement is one that is not too small to meet and not too big as well so that any lucky and diligent player should be able to achieve it. Anywhere within 30% is fine for me, it can be achieved faster through original games although it will be hard through sports betting.
There is no free money when it comes to bonuses with wagering requirement as it is usually about deposit bonus.
Even if there is something like FS bonus or No Deposit bonus that you can get without deposit but the most common rule in order to complete the wagering requirement of the winning money from the FS or No Deposit bonus is only counted when you use real balance.
One more thing, you are trying to complete wagering requirement by playing original games? That will be harder.
First because most casinos do not count wager on original games toward wagering requirement, if there are casinos that do count it, it is usually contribute small percentage only.
11. Post 66679354 (unedited backup) (by Moreno233) (scraped on Sat May 2 12:29:38 CEST 2026) in What’s an acceptable wagering requirement for you on Casino Bonuses?:
Personally, I don't chase bonuses, and the main reason is that it seems offered but with a caveat that you won't make any money from it. But it's understandable. For somebody who'll spend a lot of time playing, however, it may be worth it. For me, it's a waste of time.
I also do not feel comfortable chasing bonuses in casinos but then since it is free money and something that a player is entitled to whenever they meet the condition, it is only fair that the condition be possible to meet and not become a share waste of time and energy. A considerate wagering requirement is one that is not too small to meet and not too big as well so that any lucky and diligent player should be able to achieve it. Anywhere within 30% is fine for me, it can be achieved faster through original games although it will be hard through sports betting.
12. Post 66678832 (unedited backup) (by MusaMohamed) (scraped on Sat May 2 07:58:07 CEST 2026) in Bitcoin; a great companion from ditching labour-based to asset based thinking.:
I think it's not just the thinking; it's more of the capability and the goal. Earning asset-based revenue belongs to another level which many people can only dream about. I'm dreaming and working my way toward it. Majority of us are probably doing something to one day making revenue that comes from investing in assets, whatever they may be, Bitcoin being one of them. The difference with Bitcoin is that you won't be earning from it regularly unlike renting real estate assets, dividends from shares, and whatnot. But, yeah, the great thing about Bitcoin is that it isn't kept by some third parties.
We have to have jobs, get salary or at least wage for our very essential spending, and when our finance is good enough we will be able to use just part of it for investment. Invest discretionary income into Bitcoin is very good, as we will invest, accumulate bitcoin in long term, hold it a long time together with gradual accumulation practice. With Bitcoin, holding it longer time means less risk and higher probability to get bigger profit.
If our finance is not like of the rich, we will surely need very long time for Bitcoin accumulation, that is like disadvantage and advantage as likely it forces us to hold our bitcoin a long time. It's not like we can make one or two purchases and think it's done for our Bitcoin accumulation, so with gradual purchases over time, it's firstly like DCA, and more importantly it can help us gaining very good ROI.
13. Post 66676560 (unedited backup) (by thedemiurge) (scraped on Fri May 1 17:23:19 CEST 2026) in [REVIEW] Jackbit Casino – Refusing Bug Bounty for Documented Relay/History Fix:
...can you prove that they followed your specific findings? Or did the issue resolve itself concurrently?
@Darker45, to answer your question directly: The proof lies in the specificity of the failed endpoint and the timeline of the resolution.
The Specific Failure: My logs showed a persistent 404 Not Found on a very specific internal API route: GET
https://jackbit.co/api//Notifications/v2/user-notifications. This wasn't a general "site is slow" complaint; it was a pinpoint identification of a malformed or missing backend route.
The "Non-Concurrent" Fix: This issue persisted for days despite standard "user-side" troubleshooting (clearing cache/cookies, trying different browsers on Arch/Linux). It only resolved within hours of my technical report being escalated and posted here.
The Evidence of Action: A 404 error is a server-side response. For it to "resolve itself," Jackbit had to either restore the missing route or fix the API's base URL mapping. My reports (both private and public) provided them with the exact URL they needed to fix.
...it is better if you could also post the proof that you have indeed sent them emails...
I absolutely have that. As a new member, I've linked the side-by-side evidence below, but for the thread record:
Email 1 (April 16, 00:07 EDT): Sent to Compliance flagging the exact 404 API route failure.
Email 2 (April 16, 00:30 EDT): Sent to Support regarding the CSP (Content Security Policy) violations blocking the dashboard.
Email 3 (April 16, 00:43 EDT): Notified them of escalation to the Curacao Gaming Authority.
@Darker45, I've uploaded the screenshots of the sent emails and the matching console logs here:
VIEW TECHNICAL PROOF & EMAIL TIMELINEIf anyone with higher rank wouldn't mind proxying the images for the community's visibility, I would appreciate it. It’s important to show that Jackbit is using PR scripts to dismiss legitimate server-side errors as "user inconsistencies."
14. Post 66676326 (unedited backup) (by thedemiurge) (scraped on Fri May 1 16:23:37 CEST 2026) in [REVIEW] Jackbit Casino – Refusing Bug Bounty for Documented Relay/History Fix:
...we would like to clarify that the issue you encountered is no longer present... related to a your-side inconsistency.
@Jackbit.com, calling a 404 Not Found on a core API endpoint and a Content Security Policy (CSP) violation a "user-side inconsistency" is a bold move on a technical forum.
For the benefit of the community and @Darker45, let’s look at the actual timeline of this "inconsistency":
The Bug: I documented and posted logs showing that your transaction history dashboard was attempting to fetch data from a malformed/missing API route. My browser didn't "hallucinate" a 404; your server returned it.
The "Non-Response": I reached out via Trustpilot and here. I received the exact same word-for-word script on both platforms (see screenshot below) claiming "no changes were made."
https://i.postimg.cc/tRvNhrZt/Screenshot-from-2026-05-01-10-16-36.pngThe Miracle Fix: Within hours of my technical report, the exact endpoint that was returning a 404 suddenly started returning a 200 OK.
If no changes were made to the "Transaction History page," then a backend routing fix or a CDN cache invalidation was clearly deployed to resolve the API failure I flagged. Claiming "no changes" while the site magically starts working right after a bug report is the definition of a silent patch.
@Darker45, to answer your question: The "proof" that they followed my findings is the fact that the site was broken for days, I provided the specific 404 logs, and it was fixed immediately following my post—all while they publicly deny any error existed.
I’m not looking for a script; I’m looking for an acknowledgment of the technical report. If Jackbit wants to claim it was a "user-side" issue, I’d love to hear the technical explanation of how a user's local "inconsistency" can trigger a 404 error on a remote server's API routing.
VIEW EVIDENCE: Side-by-Side Comparison of Jackbit's Scripted ResponseAs a newer member, I can't embed images yet. If a high-ranked member wouldn't mind proxying these images into the thread for visibility, the technical evidence is here:
https://postimg.cc/XXF5Wkgp
15. Post 66674764 (unedited backup) (by free-bit.co.in) (scraped on Fri May 1 05:36:01 CEST 2026) in Bull or bear market after Jerome Powell completes his term?:
In the first place, the power that appointed him is generally pro Bitcoin. I don't think he'd go against that. Secondly, the playing field is generally in the hands of the giants in the financial and banking sector, which at this point is generally embracing Bitcoin. Had he been anti-Bitcoin, he wouldn't have possibly been specifically picked for that position.
The role of the Chairman of the Fed is to manage US monetary policy, control inflation and maintain the stability of the financial system. Therefore, the selection of the Fed chairman will be based on economic factors. Trump would not choose and the Senate would not agree to have Kevin Warsh take this position simply because he like or dislike bitcoin.
Bitcoin has never been a sufficiently important factor or criterion in appointments to such high level position.
By the way, do you still believe that Trump is a supporter of Bitcoin?
