I like this synopsis of the permabulls. I would have to agree man someone who has waited cycles and held on is definitely someone who has resilience and is showing some major optimism just by simply still being there at the end of the day. Those folks are diamond hand owners for sure. But at what cost did it come to them at? They all kick themselves at the end of the day for not selling and they still refuse to sell until the price can get back up to those levels.

The difference between $3.1 million and $2.94 is $160 thousand. If Polymarket will be able to pay for $2.94 million, it will also be able to pay the remaining $160 thousand. Polymarket is a very big market that can pay much more if that amount was stolen from their users because of Polymarket fault. The breach can not get more than this, even if it get more than this, it is not going to be a far higher amount of money than $3 million. But I saw somewhere that the exchange was hacked 2 months ago also.

This is the most balanced take in the thread. Concentration of supply in any single entity is a structural risk regardless of their intentions or public statements.

The real issue is not whether Saylor is good or bad for Bitcoin personally. The issue is that when one entity controls such a large percentage of circulating supply, their financial obligations become Bitcoin's problem. Strategy has obligations to shareholders and creditors. Those obligations do not disappear in a bear market.
History shows that even the most vocal "never sell" advocates eventually sell when financial pressure becomes severe enough. Mt Gox trustees said the same thing. Luna foundation said the same thing.

Bitcoin's strength comes from decentralization. Anything that moves away from that principle, even if well-intentioned, introduces systemic risk that did not exist before.

Yeah, for their sake i hope it stays at this, and doesn't get any larger. Though i am sure they can cover far more than that, but a loss is a loss and it hurts, especially when the service is facing a lot of regulatory problems in so many countries, plus a federal investigation in the U.S.. They have also been restricted in a lot of countries too.

It is surely not the best time for the prediction service. But this would have been avoided if they were proactive and spent a good portion of their revenue into their platform's security.

"Ignored them" is an understatement. They straight-up made fun of the vulnerability disclosers on X and attacked their credibility.

The whole thing is a shitshow, and I will pull up tweets from Polymarket later demonstrating the FAFO behavior, but I'm currently typing on a device that doesn't support the X client.

Needless to say, Polymarket got what they deserved. Feel bad for the users, but they were let down by the arrogant behavior of Polymarket.

And instead they buy when there is a decline and continue to collect bitcoin from time to time when there is a massive correction, because they always have an optimistic view of the future and how the polarization of the bitcoin price will always be repeated, this is what we need to understand, instead of just waiting for the price to fall deeper, and that logic always doesn't happen well because they always think negatively about the market decline that will continue.

This also implies those who are more concerned with how their long-term is much better than just talking about tomorrow's correction which could possibly be much deeper, I think they don't deny that either, it's just that they don't make it a fear or a curse, but rather an opportunity that they can take.

Guys from EU. Which exchange do you use now or do you recommend for use instead of Binance?

What makes highest-paid lawyers the best in the world? Is it their knowledge or their connections? I think that it's their connections with prosecutors, judge and so on and in such cases, connections aren't enough because this is an extremely serious task. I'm not a lawyer or someone into law school but this is just my opinion.

This is so true! It's not definitely an operation bye China because if it was, others wouldn't be allowed. It's quite logical to not allow Binance on the European market easily because Binance is one of the shadiest crypto exchange, they have a very dirty history.

There's a chance that amount is not really big for them so they can use that funds freely. But yeah, I doubt every user is like that. Some of them definitely bite more than they can chew and hoping that their funds won't be drained.

About the bug bounty program, it seems like they already have one? Not sure if the user in screenshot already reported that or not, but so far they seemed to have received more than 800 reports already. CMIIW.

I think it was not comparative. In my observation, this research only shows that the number of people getting interested in sports betting significantly increased, just like how the population increases everyday. So, it's just make sense that the cases of gambling addiction will also increase.



That's right.
I also believe other gambling games are far more addictive than sports gambling, for this exact reason.
Some cases may have been linked to sports betting maybe because the person is not only engaged in slot or any other highly addictive games.

They're currently doing that. Just recently, PAGCOR has ordered that online gambling ads should be replaced with their 24/7 National Problem Gambling Helpline (NPGH). You can view this in their official website. But just like Darker45 said, their control is only limited to licensed gambling platforms.

I didn't know that PAGCOR has this type of family exclusion and I think they need to educate the country about this to make the initiative from them. But that would mean lesser profit for the casinos where the family self exclusion will be applied.

That's the cons of it, if the casino is unregulated and unregistered in our territory. OP and the others won't be able to do it and ask for PAGCORs help, maybe the only way is to directly contact that casino and plead them for that specific family member of theirs to be self excluded.

That's true there are other Chinese exchanges operating in Europe but none of them are also as big as Binance.

When Binance is gone, those other Chinese exchanges won't will the gap Binance left behind. US exchanges probably will. That's why I asked "Who benefits most from this decision?"

Maybe some European exchanges will also benefit but It is pretty damn obvious it won't be the Chinese ones.

That's why, Bye Binance = Bye China.

Thanks. I will add them in the list.

Yes, the definition of "going all in" is important. "Going all in" means here investing all your sacred money.


Sacred money does not include selling your home, taking loans and other extreme measures that are not sustainable in the (very) long run.

This is not possible, and if you knew anything about the basics of technology you would know that it is not possible. The only way to do this is to completely prevent the person from going to the internet, no other measures will work. As long as they can access new casinos, they can always find a way to find another platform to play on. Within the house of the family member you can set up gambling blocks of various house, but again this is something that can be bypassed even as simply as switching to another internet source or device.

Even if they all did comply with that regulations, there are still crypto-only casinos that are decentralized and because of that there is simply never a way to fully prevent someone from gambling online. If they really wanted to, they can always find another way to do it.

People will always have different views of an asset or business idea. While many people are interested in Bitcoin because of its volitility other are seeing it as a disadvantage. I guess that some people will not invest in Bitcoin if the price eventually remains stable. Volatility is what makes Bitcoin profitable to investors. A stable Bitcoin will promote it as a currency since many businesses might start accepting it. But the idea of Bitcoin as an asset will start declining. So the OP should take advantage of the opportunities volatility offers instead of becoming scared of it.

Online gambling is rampant in the Philippines, also because of the influencers who don't care if those who sign up under their link get addicted to gambling, in addition to the paid
ads that these promoters use.

So I also think that such situations are unlikely to happen today, because whether illegal or legal casinos, it seems like they only have one owner
and the one behind them could also be a politician.

Oh yeah, welcome to the Philippines hahahah.
I'm curious if our government really practices it, and even if these gambling platforms acknowledge this? I'm really curious to see someone who has personal experience doing these, self-exclusions, and especially these family exclusions.

---

So, reading some of the posts, this is more likely based on the country you are in. Not a platform, instead, because, for example, here in the Philippines, I can still use some popular platforms even though they are not based in the Philippines.

Exactly.
As long as the player who got addicted is not willing to help himself, there's not much that the family can do, because he will always find a way to gamble on a different platform or on an offshore gambling site.
And yeah, here in the PH, you can find hundreds of gambling platform that operates outside the scope of PAGCOR. The worst thing is, a lot of players prefer unregulated platforms because they are under the impression that they can win more often than on the regulated ones.
We can almost guarantee that their customer service is awful, and a family self-exclusion request may just be ignored.

Yes some of the country supports self-exclusions even in the Philippines there is and this just requires a proof of relationship of course.


This is like what Darker45 mentioned in the quote above.

Also, another way is to make a direct contact with the casino if you wanted to make an exclusion with the specific user, but this requires verification but for me its more ideal if you help them to seek a rehabilitation to prevent too much gambling and as early as possible you can prevent them over committed in here its not just only form of entertainment its an expensive habit.

Bitcoin is only one, unique and there is also only one Bitcoin market for everyone. In a same market with one asset, people will think about the market, speculate the market trend and next movements differently and because of such opposite thinkings, they will make different trading decisions. Because of market volatility, traders are most sensitive with it and possible inaccurate and bad trading positions as well as decisions for their exits.

With people who understand about trading and risks of trading, then make strong choice to invest their money in Bitcoin and ignore trading, they can feel something really opposite than traders see. They see greater opportunities, more safety with Bitcoin because most volatile times in Bitcoin market is when they can accumulate bitcoins with cheaper prices. Then they will not trade, but withdraw bitcoins to their non custodial wallets, and hold a long time while will continue their accumulation.

Yes, this is a logical suggestion. In my opinion, we should also find some alternatives that will help us maintain our peace of mind in our investments and real life. Just like you played football with your child and it gave you peace of mind now, similarly, investors should find some form of entertainment to keep their thoughts active. I have seen many investors who get bogged down in unnecessary thoughts after investing in Bitcoin, and later this thought becomes the reason for their peace of mind and investment discipline.

Life is too short to spend on seeking financial independence. I like what you said that there is a need to live a balanced life. As we keep pursuing our financial goals, let's seek time to do what we like doing. It could be as little as spending time with your family and friends. Playing football with my children has brought an uncommon satisfaction to me. My take is that sometimes we should learn how to find pleasure in things that don't cost so much.