Last update: 2026-03-22_Sun_23.06h (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 66536436 (unedited backup) (by UmerIdrees) (scraped on Sun Mar 22 23:00:43 CET 2026) in FTX Customer Claims Portal:
FTX is aware of this problem beforehand. This was raised many times by so many users. However, it remained unaddressed even until the actual distribution started. All it did was let them wait for additional options that never came. FTX just doesn't stop messing up with its users.
I've read that certain countries like Ukraine, Egypt, Russia, Nigeria, China, and others are left out in the distribution. I'm certain users from these countries make up a considerable portion of FTX's claimants. Now, they'll be waiting for another 3 months at least.
While FTX announces its 4th phase distribution, we are still left with no option but to wait and see what happens to our funds, as our claims aren't fully registered, as there were no distribution services providers available in our jurisdiction.
Today, I tried to open the portal again to see if there are any further options/instructions for me, but I couldn't even log in to the claim portal now as they sent the OTP to my email, but it never arrived.
Anyone here who was lucky enough to get these details fulfilled and got any refunds in early distributions
2. Post 66536013 (unedited backup) (by Findingnemo) (scraped on Sun Mar 22 20:33:07 CET 2026) in How Casinos Detect Bonus Abuse.:
Apart from all those mentioned, they also provide strict terms and conditions for these bonuses. That's probably one way to protect themselves from abuses or losses. The terms are sometimes too strict that it seems nobody would profit from them. I myself don't bother availing them.
Some says bonus are like a play money to test the system. Guess this is because they also find it hard to profit on them but if so, then casinos should rename these. The name bonus doesn't simply fit IMO. Maybe except only to those that only has no deposit requirement and those that has no or only has 1x wagering requirement.
Bonuses are not to test the system, it is there to increase the engagement and obviously, there is no free money here because casino is a business not a charity. Expecting them to double the deposit with 1x wagering is not possible. They give like 10x 20x or higher to protect their bankroll from getting wrecked by luck while still one can make it if they are lucky enough.
3. Post 66535936 (unedited backup) (by barbara44) (scraped on Sun Mar 22 20:02:07 CET 2026) in How Casinos Detect Bonus Abuse.:
Apart from all those mentioned, they also provide strict terms and conditions for these bonuses. That's probably one way to protect themselves from abuses or losses. The terms are sometimes too strict that it seems nobody would profit from them. I myself don't bother availing them.
Some says bonus are like a play money to test the system. Guess this is because they also find it hard to profit on them but if so, then casinos should rename these. The name bonus doesn't simply fit IMO. Maybe except only to those that only has no deposit requirement and those that has no or only has 1x wagering requirement.
The controversial part, however, is that it seems casinos--perhaps some--won't bother about such abuses for as long as the player ends up losing. The moment the player wins and requests for withdrawal, that's the only time the casino would break it to him/her that the winnings aren't valid because of certain violations. Fair yet sneaky.
I think no. Say you will register another account on the same IP, these bonus won't pop-up or if you can still see them but you can get an error once you click on them. An abuse is an abuse, no excuses on that. There are only shady casino that alibi's that the player do some abuses by the time they are now on the withdrawal page but I believe these players are honest at most times.
4. Post 66534758 (unedited backup) (by Kelward) (scraped on Sun Mar 22 12:33:50 CET 2026) in Bird singing contest or hidden gambling?:
I don't think this is gambling. Paying an entry fee to qualify for a contest that has a prize doesn't make it gambling. Your entry fee isn't a bet. It's for you to be allowed to participate in the competition. And this normal. Many contests require participants to pay registration fees or entry fees. Or else the Miss Universe pageant would be considered gambling.
However, those side bets are gambling. But they aren't part of the event or the competition, so they shouldn't be included in the "elements that resemble gambling".
I agree that contests shouldn't be seen as gambling because they are not open to the public to bet and either win or lose also the perticipants are not relying solely on luck to win, their skills can determine who wins the contest. But I believe that some contests have the features of gambling that is if the organizers are doing the contest for profit purposes where many contestants pay to register and after paying the winners more than the amount that they used to register the organizers are making profit. I think such contests are gambling indirectly maybe not for the contestants but the organizers are no different from casinos that have the house edge over their gamblers or contestants in the case of contests. If a contest is not profit driven then it's not gambling in anyway.
5. Post 66534747 (unedited backup) (by Cointxz) (scraped on Sun Mar 22 12:30:19 CET 2026) in New Betting Sites Stealing Funds (via arb/value betting rules):
Is there even a single casino that informs each and every user every time there's a change in the terms and conditions? I don't think so. If I'm not mistaken, it's always provided instead in the terms and conditions that it may change or gets updated anytime and continued use is tantamount to agreeing with the changes.
Stake inform their users whenever they made changes on their ToS through popup message when you open your account and you need to agree first before that popup message can be closed to assure that user read and agree to the changes.
I don’t see other casino does it and the closest notification that I saw on some casino for the ToS change is an email notification that often being ignored.
6. Post 66533483 (unedited backup) (by EluguHcman) (scraped on Sat Mar 21 23:02:37 CET 2026) in the power of resources:
Of course. The mathematics of this war was all carefully done before the first bomb was dropped. I'm not sure if they're getting some things wrong or certain developments surprised them along the way, but I'm sure the US isn't sacrificing anything for whatever selfish goal they have in mind in this war, except perhaps the lives of their own people, which I guess they don't value enough. I don't think they'd create this violence if it results into making their daily lives uncomfortable.
The US already have one of the strongest military strategies with a high degree of warfares.
So apparently before they launched the attack on the Iran, every necessary strategies must had been put to place in order to have an edge against the war.
Of course all of the plans and executions of every single move against the war surely consume resources of which we can not say they are loosing a dime in the war rather the costs of resources budgeted for the war may not affect their (US) economy system.
It is also unbelievable that the US government's does not value the lives of their own people. We also see the reactions of the US Presidents when they loses their military personnels.
7. Post 66529291 (unedited backup) (by KingsDen) (scraped on Fri Mar 20 17:16:37 CET 2026) in FTX announces 4th phase distribution. :
There were forms to properly fill out, KYC to successfully pass, deadlines set, classifications or categories where you're assigned under, amounts claimed, schedules, and so on and so forth. These are probably the bases that determine whether or not a former FTX user is eligible for this distribution phase.
I know a guy who had money on FTX, but he failed to complete all the necessary steps (iirc, he thought he wouldn't get his money back anyway so he didn't take it seriously), so he will end up getting nothing.
Worst of all, it wasn't a negligible amount either (~$10k).
I wouldn't blame him though. I haven't for a long while witnessed a successful recompensation. When I heard about the distribution information, I didn't take it seriously. But if I had $10k at stake, I would do everything I'm asked to do even if it was not going to yield a result.
I feel sorry for him, this would be a double regret scenario for him.
8. Post 66529042 (unedited backup) (by Alex077) (scraped on Fri Mar 20 16:00:13 CET 2026) in Safest countries to live with Bitcoin?:
I'm a little surprised nobody mentioned Bhutan. Perhaps everybody here loves huge modern cities?
I haven't been to that country and I only know it by what I've read, but if a world war erupts and I have the choice to move with my Bitcoin wherever I want, I think that's a nice option. It's pro-Bitcoin, low cost of living, rich in culture, with simple and friendly people, treats happiness over GDP, and so on...
Yeah, Bhutan is a great place to step away from civilization for a while and spend time meditating. But for everyday life, it’s not really practical - especially for a crypto holder.
Bhutan doesn’t ban Bitcoin, but it’s definitely not a crypto hub either. The regulations for individuals are pretty unclear, and there’s almost no developed crypto infrastructure - no real exchanges, services, or OTC options.
On top of that, there are strong restrictions on banking transfers, the internet isn’t great, and overall it’s not very convenient.
So yeah, Bhutan isn’t a place for active crypto activity - it’s more like a quiet haven for a very slow and peaceful lifestyle.
9. Post 66528516 (unedited backup) (by Rikafip) (scraped on Fri Mar 20 12:24:55 CET 2026) in FTX announces 4th phase distribution. :
There were forms to properly fill out, KYC to successfully pass, deadlines set, classifications or categories where you're assigned under, amounts claimed, schedules, and so on and so forth. These are probably the bases that determine whether or not a former FTX user is eligible for this distribution phase.
I know a guy who had money on FTX, but he failed to complete all the necessary steps (iirc, he thought he wouldn't get his money back anyway so he didn't take it seriously), so he will end up getting nothing.
Worst of all, it wasn't a negligible amount either (~$10k).
10. Post 66527783 (unedited backup) (by shinratensei_) (scraped on Fri Mar 20 06:20:43 CET 2026) in Safest countries to live with Bitcoin?:
I'm a little surprised nobody mentioned Bhutan. Perhaps everybody here loves huge modern cities?
I haven't been to that country and I only know it by what I've read, but if a world war erupts and I have the choice to move with my Bitcoin wherever I want, I think that's a nice option. It's pro-Bitcoin, low cost of living, rich in culture, with simple and friendly people, treats happiness over GDP, and so on.
The problem, however, is that it isn't easy to be a permanent resident or citizen in that country. And to remain a tourist is very expensive. But it's certainly a safe country to live with your Bitcoin.
The problem with Bhutan is I think it's not as densely populated as the other option and is pretty far away from the big countries.
People are expecting a place where they can live and sometime flying to the big country like the US. Bhutan is not a good choice if you are techy person like most of bitcoiners
11. Post 66527767 (unedited backup) (by Findingnemo) (scraped on Fri Mar 20 06:07:55 CET 2026) in How is Zelle allowed on Binance global P2P while the platform is banned in US:
How about if you're a US citizen who's now residing outside the US and has obtained a valid ID in your country of residence but still has an active US bank account, does that make it possible? There are millions of them all over the world. In my country alone, there are hundreds of thousands of US citizens who are permanent residents here. They can provide with complete KYC details including proof of address that's outside the US. Although they're still not valid for a Binance Global account really, they can actually pass KYC.
Those are like 10% possibly and the remaining most of them will be some kind of scam, people somewhere convince the US people to send money as part of socieal engineering scam, pig butchering or hacked accounts that is why some merchants require extra KYC to make sure the person who is trading behind that is also the actual owner of the funds. Trust me p2p platforms are filled with a lot of these scam/hacked accounts.
If there is a chance avoid doing p2p, and choose the safest payment mode possible to save yourself from legal complications.
12. Post 66526538 (unedited backup) (by Hatchy) (scraped on Thu Mar 19 20:23:56 CET 2026) in Why governments are not the only ones sceptical about Bitcoin's adoption.:
In a way, the government is ran by the rich. It's always their welfare that the government prioritizes. When there are programs, policies, regulations, directives, and the like, it's always the rich and powerful that benefit from them the most. The government would even go as far as sending young men to strange lands to kill or die in order to fulfill the agenda of the rich, economic or otherwise.
It's the rich who benefit the most of the status quo. Whatever disrupts or shakes the system put in place by the government also affects them. Therefore, it isn't surprising if both the government and the rich are equally skeptical of Bitcoin. On the contrary, it's expected. They move as one.
You literally spoke my mind. The rich and the government are same tools, just different fields. When inflation favours the rich, it favours the government as well. The sets of people who suffers inflatable economy is the poor. They have to work extra miles to meet up the increase in price of commodity or expenses whole their income may not necessarily be considered for an increase. Such people barly have thoughts of investments, they are mainly concerned on providing their basic needs and seeing to it that they live happily. The government and the rich goes hand in hand when it comes to the economic situation of a country, I call them the elites..
13. Post 66526432 (unedited backup) (by Faisal2202) (scraped on Thu Mar 19 19:48:43 CET 2026) in Why governments are not the only ones sceptical about Bitcoin's adoption.:
It's the rich who benefit the most of the status quo. Whatever disrupts or shakes the system put in place by the government also affects them. Therefore, it isn't surprising if both the government and the rich are equally skeptical of Bitcoin. On the contrary, it's expected. They move as one.
Usually, politics is controlled by the rich, it seems so fictional but very basic and simple idea that we all want to ignore. Rich gives them instructions and that seems really a dumb idea to trust on but I think it is not that dumb. It is true that either the rich spend a lot of money to have some influence and power or either political leaders are seeking investments from rich people to do what they ask them to do because they are also in power.
They need each other and work together and whoever won't will end up in the grave pretty simple haha.
Well, now the both rich and governments are ready to adopt bitcoin and investing in it.
14. Post 66524802 (unedited backup) (by KingsDen) (scraped on Thu Mar 19 10:01:31 CET 2026) in Why governments are not the only ones sceptical about Bitcoin's adoption.:
In a way, the government is ran by the rich. It's always their welfare that the government prioritizes.
Exactly. If Bitcoin were owned and controlled by the rich, the government would have been more open towards it. If banks and other Wall Street guys were the ones who owned Bitcoin, they wouldn't be too sceptical. But Bitcoin is the opposite of their business model. Whatever they're doing now to integrate it into their business is just because they have to be dynamic and keep up with the changes in the world.
We saw how the governmnet listened to the banks about the stablecoin issue that made coinbase CEO and other exchanges speak up.
If things are good for the rich and elite, then the governemnt will find a way to make the people think that thing is good for them.
The government is not just skeptical about Bitcoin, there are simply not happy because bitcoin is not their creation. The government is not skeptical that they will lose money in Bitcoin or bitcoin will stop existing in the nearest future. They are not just comfortable that bitcoin has not made it easy for them to control everything. Government is the mother of centralization and the Bitcoin principles stands against centralization. I think this is where the crack is coming from.
Government is fighting to be able to control bitcoin 100% before they will give in their all. And this is something that is likely not going to happen because they are a lot of people behind Bitcoin. Unless the masses loses interest in the Bitcoin business before the government will be able to hijack it. For now, the masses are super interested.
15. Post 66524796 (unedited backup) (by KingsDen) (scraped on Thu Mar 19 10:00:01 CET 2026) in Why governments are not the only ones sceptical about Bitcoin's adoption.:
In a way, the government is ran by the rich. It's always their welfare that the government prioritizes.
Exactly. If Bitcoin were owned and controlled by the rich, the government would have been more open towards it. If banks and other Wall Street guys were the ones who owned Bitcoin, they wouldn't be too sceptical. But Bitcoin is the opposite of their business model. Whatever they're doing now to integrate it into their business is just because they have to be dynamic and keep up with the changes in the world.
We saw how the governmnet listened to the banks about the stablecoin issue that made coinbase CEO and other exchanges speak up.
If things are good for the rich and elite, then the governemnt will find a way to make the people think that thing is good for them.
The government is not just skeptical about Bitcoin, there are simply not happy because bitcoin is not their creation. The government is not skeptical that they will lose money in Bitcoin or bitcoin will stop existing in the nearest future. They are not just comfortable that bitcoin has not made it easy for them to control everything. Government is the mother of centralization and the Bitcoin principles stands against centralization. I think this is where the crack is coming from.
Government is fighting to be able to control bitcoin 100% before they will give in their all. And this is something that is likely not going to happen because they are a lot of people behind Bitcoin. Unless the masses loses interest in the Bitcoin business before the government will be able to hijack it. For now, the masses are super interested.
16. Post 66524783 (unedited backup) (by Alpha Marine) (scraped on Thu Mar 19 09:54:50 CET 2026) in Why governments are not the only ones sceptical about Bitcoin's adoption.:
In a way, the government is ran by the rich. It's always their welfare that the government prioritizes.
Exactly. If Bitcoin were owned and controlled by the rich, the government would have been more open towards it. If banks and other Wall Street guys were the ones who owned Bitcoin, they wouldn't be too sceptical. But Bitcoin is the opposite of their business model. Whatever they're doing now to integrate it into their business is just because they have to be dynamic and keep up with the changes in the world.
We saw how the governmnet listened to the banks about the stablecoin issue that made coinbase CEO and other exchanges speak up.
If things are good for the rich and elite, then the governemnt will find a way to make the people think that thing is good for them.
17. Post 66524497 (unedited backup) (by kotajikikox) (scraped on Thu Mar 19 07:42:37 CET 2026) in Why governments are not the only ones sceptical about Bitcoin's adoption.:
In a way, the government is ran by the rich. It's always their welfare that the government prioritizes. When there are programs, policies, regulations, directives, and the like, it's always the rich and powerful that benefit from them the most. The government would even go as far as sending young men to strange lands to kill or die in order to fulfill the agenda of the rich, economic or otherwise.
It's the rich who benefit the most of the status quo. Whatever disrupts or shakes the system put in place by the government also affects them. Therefore, it isn't surprising if both the government and the rich are equally skeptical of Bitcoin. On the contrary, it's expected. They move as one.
The government is THE rich. They make projects only benefit for them. The ones in power are also the ones with most privilege so don’t expect the gov to prioritize your wellbeing over theirs unless the politicians elected are genuinely interested in serving others.
18. Post 66524408 (unedited backup) (by rbynxx) (scraped on Thu Mar 19 06:38:43 CET 2026) in 🏀 Two 17 Leg Parlays - I Like My Chances!! ⛹🏻♂️:
Can you provide the rest of the bet slip for this recent bet of yours? Well, good luck with that and do hope you'll make it once again but it's not bad if we can tail right? So, I think it will be for the good if we know which teams you did bet for.
if you got 25 picks right, 17 must be easier.
Unless there's that one leg that will mess the whole parlay. Minus 8 for this parlay might be easier but it's different this time around so the risk of losing it all is huge.
19. Post 66523811 (unedited backup) (by AmoreJaz) (scraped on Wed Mar 18 23:33:25 CET 2026) in Bitcoin The Movie?:
The actual making of Bitcoin is for Satoshi to tell because it's his/her/their creation, but since he/she/they aren't around anymore, who will tell the story?
I guess the most that could be done is a sort of a documentary featuring those who corresponded with Satoshi before the release of the whitepaper in 2008 and the launching early in 2009. Even this could only shed a little light as to how Satoshi really worked on Bitcoin.
If there's such a movie, much of it is probably filled by mere assumptions and imaginations of the creators.
But would those individuals be available to disclose their communications with Satoshi? Because if they are, we already have seen a very solid documentary surrounding the early days of btc. But it seems that they are not interested to divulge behind their dealings with him.
20. Post 66521693 (unedited backup) (by Taskford) (scraped on Wed Mar 18 10:41:07 CET 2026) in Bitcoin The Movie?:
The actual making of Bitcoin is for Satoshi to tell because it's his/her/their creation, but since he/she/they aren't around anymore, who will tell the story?
I think they will get those info on what so called expert on history of Bitcoin, but I don't think that they can point out the real situation happen since the real Satoshi is not around. Maybe what we can see is just made up stories to sensualized the movie and make it appealing to their audiences.
I guess the most that could be done is a sort of a documentary featuring those who corresponded with Satoshi before the release of the whitepaper in 2008 and the launching early in 2009. Even this could only shed a little light as to how Satoshi really worked on Bitcoin.
If they can interview those people those people working with Satoshi on early days of Bitcoin then this will make the documentary became more interesting.
If there's such a movie, much of it is probably filled by mere assumptions and imaginations of the creators.
Yeah the movie will provably like that and it will add up another speculation that will raise up more curiosity about the real identity of Satoshi.
21. Post 66521692 (unedited backup) (by henry_of_skalitz) (scraped on Wed Mar 18 10:41:01 CET 2026) in Bitcoin The Movie?:
The actual making of Bitcoin is for Satoshi to tell because it's his/her/their creation, but since he/she/they aren't around anymore, who will tell the story?
I guess the most that could be done is a sort of a documentary featuring those who corresponded with Satoshi before the release of the whitepaper in 2008 and the launching early in 2009. Even this could only shed a little light as to how Satoshi really worked on Bitcoin.
If there's such a movie, much of it is probably filled by mere assumptions and imaginations of the creators.
And that's the fun of it. there wouldn't be the "right" interpretation.
22. Post 66518639 (unedited backup) (by julerz12) (scraped on Tue Mar 17 14:26:38 CET 2026) in [OPEN] Bet25.com ⚽ Smart Crypto Casino 🎰 Signature Campaign:
Additional funds have been received. Kindly confirm in this thread if you guys want to retain your slots.
Officially resumes 03/18/2026
Courtesy tag:
odunybiz
rezakurnia66
shawonngp
JoyMarsha
Stormisover
barbara44
nimogsm
CryptoYar
Darker45
SquallLeonhart