Last update: 2026-03-06_Fri_11.06h (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 66478832 (unedited backup) (by Yaunfitda) (scraped on Fri Mar 6 11:02:13 CET 2026) in Usyk VS Verhoeven Pyramids in Giza May 23 Unified Heavyweight title:
I haven't heard of the name Rico Verhoeven. That's without disrespect. The man is acknowledged as a legend in kickboxing, of course. I wonder, however, how he's given a direct line to the undisputed championship right away without passing through the ranks first. He hasn't boxed for more than a decade and wasn't even a big name prior to that--fought only once as a professional, as a matter of fact--and yet he's given the chance to become an undisputed champion just like that. The sport of boxing would be shaken to the core if Usyk loses, and it's always a possibility.
Maybe his name was brought up by someone close to the power broker of boxing today and so he approved him knowing the Usyk has a good chance to beat him and at the same time, fans will see that Verhoeven is a legend and could give problems to Usyk in this fight. Sometimes you just got lucky if you're well known and maybe you have connections too that's why he as chosen. But as far as Usyk goes, this is just another fight, just to get his body busy and he won't have the ring rust if ever he will go and fight against pro-boxer in the Heavyweight division. Although it seems that he has clean this division, there are still interim champions that he need to face to really cemented his legacy as the best Heavyweight boxer in this era.
2. Post 66478744 (unedited backup) (by barbara44) (scraped on Fri Mar 6 10:31:38 CET 2026) in ETFs dead already?:
There are still talks about them Bitcoin ETFs, but not as though they're a new thing. Of course, their volumes rise and fall. I did a quick check on IBIT's volume, BlackRock's Bitcoin ETF. It's still in the billions daily. That remains huge, far from dead.
I think he meant from the craze on social media, which is lower than before, because he literally can't mean by volume, most of the volume in bitcoin is coming from these ETFs. Although more harm has also been done by them if they done good too. ETFs at the start were in hype, everyone was talking about them, how it can be good or bad. It was an awesome time.
The
Bitcoin price was shooting like a rocket and everything was so bullish. At that time, many made huge profits. But now, as predicted, new users like to invest via Bitcoin ETFs because they really think it is wise to avoid the struggle, which in reality is not a struggle of managing the keys and wallets.
Yeah, that must be it. Most of the ETF's already share their information on how much they buy and sell and their size, and it's evident that they are a lot more holding than the retail investors like us, because they are already rich so they do not need to sell. Still as far as I have seen, there are people there who sell too, but they do not react the way we do in market movements, it's much smaller, because rich people do not care about the daily movements, they care about a decade, and that's what makes retail investor not earn as much as them.
If bitcoin investments somehow manage to show another 10x returns, then we can see people rush behind all type of bitcoin opportunities and ETF also may get revived from that but until then we are going to see that ETF is slowly losing its attractiveness.
3. Post 66477079 (unedited backup) (by Hamza2424) (scraped on Thu Mar 5 20:36:08 CET 2026) in ETFs dead already?:
There are still talks about them Bitcoin ETFs, but not as though they're a new thing. Of course, their volumes rise and fall. I did a quick check on IBIT's volume, BlackRock's Bitcoin ETF. It's still in the billions daily. That remains huge, far from dead.
I think he meant from the craze on social media, which is lower than before, because he literally can't mean by volume, most of the volume in bitcoin is coming from these ETFs. Although more harm has also been done by them if they done good too. ETFs at the start were in hype, everyone was talking about them, how it can be good or bad. It was an awesome time.
The
Bitcoin price was shooting like a rocket and everything was so bullish. At that time, many made huge profits. But now, as predicted, new users like to invest via Bitcoin ETFs because they really think it is wise to avoid the struggle, which in reality is not a struggle of managing the keys and wallets.
4. Post 66473208 (unedited backup) (by Bluedrem) (scraped on Wed Mar 4 19:20:07 CET 2026) in Tourism amid chaos:
Tourism will have to be put on hold because of the conflict. You just can't risk it. I guess the bigger problem aren't those tourists who had second thoughts and had to reschedule their vacation; it's those who have already gone to the middle east but were forced to extend their stay because of flight cancellations. They're practically locked down. That must mean unforeseen additional expenses, going beyond paid time offs, jobs and businesses and families back home waiting indefinitely.
Even if we think about running the tourism industry in conflict areas, I don't think tourists will go there. Due to the regional situation, there is an unstable situation throughout the Middle East. The people living there are very scared in this situation. They are thinking about leaving the country, on the contrary, it is unimaginable for tourists to come there. Every person loves his life and loving his life can never go to a risky place for vacation.
5. Post 66473027 (unedited backup) (by Satofan44) (scraped on Wed Mar 4 18:20:25 CET 2026) in Volatility IS a bug, not a feature :):
Now, are low-volatility CBDCs a competitor to Bitcoin, taking into account the "merchant driven" approach?
We could assume "yes", because CBDCs would also provide a low-cost payment network for merchants, and it could be that this erodes a bit the advantage that Bitcoin has over PayPal and credit cards (less fees).
It is not really a competitor though, inasmuch you could call anything that could be adopted by merchants competitors to Bitcoin. Stablecoins, CBDCs and all centralized shitcoins are not competitors to Bitcoin -- they are entirely different even if they can fulfill similar functionality and use cases but in a centralized way.
However, looking at the bigger picture, a type of money with less inflation than fiat (and CBDCs are a type of fiat) would mean less hedging risks for merchants. Bitcoin still has high hedging risks due to its volatility. But a low-volatility Bitcoin with barely noticeable bear markets and a still steady bullish tendency (the most likely "success scenario" in 10-15 years after volatility reduction has been progressed further fueled by mass adoption) would be very competitive as merchants could simply HODL their coins instead having to think too much about investments to "win" against inflation.
They could already do this were merchants more educated, smarter, and more long-term oriented.
The good thing is that it's something that's closely associated with its infancy. The more mature it becomes, the more mainstream it goes, the clearer the regulations are, and so on, the less volatile it grows.
You completely missed the point of this thread.
I understand that you’re clamoring for the volatility of Bitcoin to reduce but it’s just quite unfortunate that it would be impossible for such a thing to happen right now with Bitcoin, I believe that is how Bitcoin have been made for a very long time, so it would be more likely that Bitcoin would keep going up and down and increasing and giving us a new all time high, Bitcoin can never be a stable coins, because most of this stable coins aren’t as efficient as Bitcoin most people are still investing in Bitcoin and feeling comfortable with the Volatility nature of Bitcoin, and when Bitcoin gives us a bear season I’m also completely sure that we would have a new ATH, so I think now is also a time for us to buy more and keep buying more Bitcoin.
How Bitcoin was designed has nothing to do with market volatility, they are as irrelevant from each other as they could be.
I really don’t see how Bitcoin volatility would can lower, because over the past years that is how bitcoin have been made more volatile, I think the volatility of Bitcoin is one of the main reasons why Bitcoin is where it is today as one of the leading cryptocurrencies assets that anyone one can have, because it’s essentially active, I have looked at some stable coins and none of the stable coins can be compared to Bitcoin, so being stable and lowering of volatility would not change anything.
Nonsense. If the volatility does not reduce, Bitcoin is going to die. Read other posts before you write your replies here. The numbers have been presented, they are not refutable.
The 2011 Cycle: -93%
The 2013 Cycle: upside 40x ($29 to $1,163), downside -86.9%.
The 2017 Cycle: upside 16.9x ($1,163 to $19,666), downside -83.6%.
The 2021 Cycle: upside 3.50x ($19,666 to $69,000), downside -76%.
The 2025 Cycle (current, downside in progress): upside 1.8x ($69,000 to $124,700), downside 50% with a price of $62,350.
The 2025 Cycle (current, downside projected): upside 1.8x ($69,000 to $124,700), downside 75% with a price of $31175.
Some fast AI work.
38.15% reduction in return on average per cycle (upside).
15.74% reduction in downside risk on average per cycle.
So what happens next? Here are the projected upside and downside numbers for the next cycle:
2029 cycle: upside 1.1133x (1.8 - 38.15%), maximum price 138,686, downside -42.13% (0.5-15.74%), lowest price $72,171.
2029 cycle (using 75% projected downside in the current cycle from some proponents): upside 1.1133x (1.8 - 38.15%), maximum price 138,686, downside 63.19% (0.75-15.74%), lowest price $51050.
Do you not see an issue already and
that something has to change? If we subtracted another 38% from the 1.1 return for the 2033 cycle Bitcoin would start printing negative returns. When reading this, don't waste time adjusting useless things such as whether the ATH was $69,000 or $69,540 -- you are just wasting time, it does not change anything about the trend. Only do that if you are willing to revise the whole.
6. Post 66472853 (unedited backup) (by OgNasty) (scraped on Wed Mar 4 17:29:19 CET 2026) in Attack on Iran - effects on markets/Bitcoin:
I'm not seeing a significant effect on the Bitcoin market that could clearly be attributed to the attack on Iran.
In fact, the price of bitcoin has risen after the US-Iran conflict. Could it be that some people are turning to bitcoin as an alternative?
Of course, a spike on oil prices is expected. That's probably the specific market where the impact of the attack is truly felt considering that massive supply distributions passing through the strait of Hormuz would certainly be halted because of the conflict.
I don't know if oil prices are starting to rise now? I know that the Strait of Hormuz is a route for intercontinental trade, with at least 20% of trade passing through it, according to the news. Other reports say that the Strait of Hormuz is being heavily guarded by Iranian forces.
Some are saying the Abraham Lincoln air craft carrier was hit by four missles.
If true we could see a crash on monday morning.
This has caused confusion. There are reports on X that the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln was attacked by missiles from Iran, while major media outlets are saying the Abraham Lincoln is fine. I don't know which is true.
I spent five years in the Navy I checked quite a few sources that most people do not know about and I have no proof and no disproof which is very interesting in and of itself.
Well, the video they released showed a spacecraft flying into a ship that was sunk 80 years ago, so there's that...
The Abraham Lincoln has a whole lot of American soldiers on it. If it was struck with missiles, every news outlet in the world would be showing those images and blaming Trump for the loss.
I would also say it is possible that both the news and the non-event are true. An aircraft carrier can both be attacked by missiles and be fine.
7. Post 66469960 (unedited backup) (by philipma1957) (scraped on Tue Mar 3 21:12:13 CET 2026) in Attack on Iran - effects on markets/Bitcoin:
I'm not seeing a significant effect on the Bitcoin market that could clearly be attributed to the attack on Iran.
In fact, the price of bitcoin has risen after the US-Iran conflict. Could it be that some people are turning to bitcoin as an alternative?
Of course, a spike on oil prices is expected. That's probably the specific market where the impact of the attack is truly felt considering that massive supply distributions passing through the strait of Hormuz would certainly be halted because of the conflict.
I don't know if oil prices are starting to rise now? I know that the Strait of Hormuz is a route for intercontinental trade, with at least 20% of trade passing through it, according to the news. Other reports say that the Strait of Hormuz is being heavily guarded by Iranian forces.
Some are saying the Abraham Lincoln air craft carrier was hit by four missles.
If true we could see a crash on monday morning.
This has caused confusion. There are reports on X that the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln was attacked by missiles from Iran, while major media outlets are saying the Abraham Lincoln is fine. I don't know which is true.
I spent five years in the Navy I checked quite a few sources that most people do not know about and I have no proof and no disproof which is very interesting in and of itself.
8. Post 66467445 (unedited backup) (by GreatArkansas) (scraped on Tue Mar 3 07:45:43 CET 2026) in Wartime performance of BTC:
I don't agree that what's happening right now in the middle east is a major test for Bitcoin. I don't even agree that we're in a wartime period. I even hesitate to call this a war. It's more of just an attack. This is just the US and its partner bullying an independent nation. Of course, Iran retaliated, but so far things haven't yet escalated into a real war. It's just a tit for tat for now.
As to Bitcoin's performance, so far so good. It seems it remains largely indifferent to what's merely a regional conflict, which is nothing new and surprising in that part of the world.
Same with Covid 19 before. We must not relate Bitcoin to any of this. Bitcoin is decentralized; no one can control it.
So for me, if the price of Bitcoin reacts to these geopolitical tensions, so be it, because even non Bitcoin market also behaves like that.
So if for some people may see this as opportunity to buy more cheap Bitcoins, then that's good.
9. Post 66467204 (unedited backup) (by BernyJB) (scraped on Tue Mar 3 04:52:43 CET 2026) in In wallet exchanges:
Now, that's a great birthday present for yourself. Advance happy birthday!
By the way, does buying a Trezor address your original concern about doing exchanges within the wallet itself? I understand Trezor Suite also has built-in buy and trade features, but they're also not handling the transactions themselves. They're also done using partner providers, meaning third parties. These parties may or may not ask for KYC when doing transactions.
Thank you!
I wasn't aware the Trezor also used third party apps, buy if I'm going to have to use an exchange anyways, I'd rather use one that gives me more security and lets me work with thousands of coins, as opposed to just about a dozen.
10. Post 66467192 (unedited backup) (by Oasisman) (scraped on Tue Mar 3 04:44:55 CET 2026) in [NEWS]NewYork Suing Valve for for promoting "illegal gambling" Inside their game:
This is a form of gambling, but that's stretching the definition of gambling to include stuff that aren't money but could be assigned with monetary value.
But if the goal is to prevent the kids from learning about gambling early on, I guess they have an argument. Skin gambling is happening, rampant even. When I was playing Dota II, my friends were fond of betting their arcana or immortal skins. Although this isn't the typical adult gambling that kids aren't allowed, since these items could easily be sold for real money, it could still be considered gambling. And, yeah, should be removed.
Exactly!
I don't know how is it an "illegal" gambling when it is part of the game. I may agree that it is a form of gambling, since players will need to pay to get random stuff. If being lucky, they'll get stuff which could have a great monetary value when being sold to other players P2P, or could be used to improve the character's appearance or attributes.
So, If they considered this as illegal gambling, then I don't know how they call that in-game betting system Dota2 used to, when there's a major tournaments. Those arcana and immortal skins were expensive before. I have not played the game for quite a long time already, so I'm not sure whether it still exist.
11. Post 66465773 (unedited backup) (by salad daging) (scraped on Mon Mar 2 19:28:07 CET 2026) in Attack on Iran - effects on markets/Bitcoin:
I'm not seeing a significant effect on the Bitcoin market that could clearly be attributed to the attack on Iran.
In fact, the price of bitcoin has risen after the US-Iran conflict. Could it be that some people are turning to bitcoin as an alternative?
Of course, a spike on oil prices is expected. That's probably the specific market where the impact of the attack is truly felt considering that massive supply distributions passing through the strait of Hormuz would certainly be halted because of the conflict.
I don't know if oil prices are starting to rise now? I know that the Strait of Hormuz is a route for intercontinental trade, with at least 20% of trade passing through it, according to the news. Other reports say that the Strait of Hormuz is being heavily guarded by Iranian forces.
Some are saying the Abraham Lincoln air craft carrier was hit by four missles.
If true we could see a crash on monday morning.
This has caused confusion. There are reports on X that the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln was attacked by missiles from Iran, while major media outlets are saying the Abraham Lincoln is fine. I don't know which is true.
12. Post 66465259 (unedited backup) (by Sandra_hakeem) (scraped on Mon Mar 2 17:35:07 CET 2026) in Have you ever gambled at 'out of place' place? :
What could be considered "out of place", though? That's quite subjective, open for everybody's interpretation.
Do you get the point? What I may consider "out of place", may actually be a comfort zone to anyone else. Personally, I can't gamble on a treadmill (let's start off with your example). Sounds really uncomfortable to do, just by typing it. I'm not an Olympic medallist, so I don't have to multi-task -- that's like trying to gamble while on the steering wheels, on a high way.
There's a level of relaxation that I need to make any selections. If something's bothering me, I don't gamble. I sort out whatever it is. The dopamine fix, for me, has to be more of a relaxing procedure.
13. Post 66462184 (unedited backup) (by Akbarkoe) (scraped on Sun Mar 1 21:24:38 CET 2026) in Have you ever gambled at 'out of place' place? :
What could be considered "out of place", though? That's quite subjective, open for everybody's interpretation.
Although I don't do treadmill, that doesn't seem "out of place" enough for me. That's you exercising while having some fun gambling. I don't find an issue in there. Perhaps what's out of place is when you're gambling while in class or while attending church on a Sunday or while working during office hours or while on a date.
In my view it's not worth it, maybe it's subjective because our interpretations are different, but if you imagine continuously, grouping sports with gambling at the same time, I don't think there will be a sense of fun.
Important meetings and so on I don't think gambling should be present at that time because we will have two focuses that will certainly ignore one of them.
It is better to gamble at a time that has been provided by yourself, so we can focus more and not disturb other activities, this is the best solution as a gambler who understands the priority of activities, unless someone is already addicted, he will do gambling wherever he is.
14. Post 66460979 (unedited backup) (by SeriouslyGiveaway) (scraped on Sun Mar 1 14:51:49 CET 2026) in Not End Of Bitcoin - Buyer Opportunity?:
Bitcoin falling to $63,000 and we're talking about "Bitcoin is coming to the end and will fall to zero"? Are we stuck in the past? Tell me, can you afford even half a Bitcoin today?
It's not the time for calling Bitcoin to fall to $0 too soon.
People will do it naturally by calling Bitcoin falls to $50k, $40k, $30k, $20k, $15k and they will continue to lower down prices of Bitcoin in their next calls. I don't know from $60k, will there be any chance for them calling Bitcoin falls to $0?
I guess there is no chance to make such "Bitcoin falls to $0" and create any panic in the market especially if the time for such call is when Bitcoin exchanged around $60k.
Calling $0 is like calling Bitcoin is dead that has been more barely called recent years.
https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoin-obituaries/
15. Post 66460455 (unedited backup) (by libert19) (scraped on Sun Mar 1 11:08:13 CET 2026) in Have you ever gambled at 'out of place' place? :
What could be considered "out of place", though? That's quite subjective, open for everybody's interpretation.
Yes, it's subjective, and I am happy with whatever subjective interpretations people come up with.
16. Post 66454470 (unedited backup) (by julerz12) (scraped on Fri Feb 27 16:16:26 CET 2026) in [OPEN] Bet25.com ⚽ Smart Crypto Casino 🎰 Signature Campaign:
I've received the additional funds for this campaign. This signature campaign will now resume.
All previously enrolled participants may retain their respective slots. Kindly respond to this thread if you want to keep your slot.
WEEK 11 starts on March 1.
Courtesy tag on previous participants:
odunybiz
rezakurnia66
shawonngp
JoyMarsha
DiMarxist
barbara44
nimogsm
CryptoYar
Darker45
SquallLeonhart