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.

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. 

It sounds like a site that could amplify someone's depression from selling their BTC early.  It's a fun site nonetheless.

This is cool too. It's like a traffic jam monitoring service but for crypto. 

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.

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.

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.

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.

@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.


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 TIMELINE

If 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."

@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.png
The 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 Response

As 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

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?

Thing is that this amount is not really leaving the market. It's the ficticious value of market capitalization which gets down by this amount.

This is not the same thing as you can see in a very popular example with an altcoin:

We have a premined token which just enters the market, with 1 million units. A buyer buys one of this tokens for 1$ each. The market cap explodes to 1 million. Then the buyer sells it but for 10 cents. He has lost 90 cents which is the money which really "left the market" because there were no other buyers and sellers. But the market cap crashes to $100,000 - according to that change, 900,000$ "have left the market"!

In the case of Bitcoin we have no premined tokens, but we have Satoshi's coins and a lot of early adopters' coins which were "valuated" the last time 10 years or more ago, i.e. there is a quite big percentage of the coins that never were moved for more than a little fraction of the current price. But for market cap, they count as if they were bought at $75000+ and not mined on a laptop for $0,01 or so per unit.

So if any media outlet came up with something like "1 trillion USD were destroyed in the Bitcoin crash", I would dismiss it outright as FUD. And yes, there is a huge volume on exchanges currently, but many coins are simply moved back and forth from one trader on the same CEX to another one according to their strategies, i.e. some coins change their owner frequently while a lot of coins are not really available at the markets at all.

There's no evidence for that. It may have happened, or it may have not. All what I was saying is that there was a probability (for me, higher than 50%) that the 2022 crash would have been significantly (i.e. 10 percentage points or more) less deep if Terra/Luna and FTX didn't happen. We will never know this but for me it's valid to try to evaluate the influence of crypto firm bankruptcies - because they erode trust in Bitcoin and the crypto sector, at least for some weeks, and they also are good "food" for shorters trying to capitalize from the resulting panic sales.

I don't know if what you say about silver is true, that is speculative imo. But I agree that the gold "dormant" at central banks is indeed a major factor to contribute to gold's stability.

Bitcoin is not really designed to be used as an everyday currency, but rather as an alternative currency that can be used in e-commerce. Just as the gold standard is the best, Bitcoin can be a great alternative. However, if it is only positioned as a small alternative currency, it is also enough to some extent. Bitcoin is a medium where people who do not want to pay through a third party can transact independently. The free payment mentioned in your comment is really attractive to many.