Roblox is cancer and the kids that are playing games like this are idiots. Any system that has randomized rewards like this is not only pure gambling, it is being used to manipulate a growing brain to be more receptive to gambling-style behaviors in the long term. Therefore, we are experiencing a tobacco 2.0 situation just primarily focused on kids and not limited to Roblox at all. All randomized lootboxes and similar mechanisms should be permanently banned from every game, micro transactions too. This is one of the rare cases where regulators should actually get deeply involved and make rules. The capitalistic model of value extraction is a disease that needs to be abolished.

If governments were not corrupt, there would be no talks. There is nothing to talk about, the Roblox people are doing this knowingly. They are dishonest and greedy idiots.

That is not necessarily an issue with Roblox, although Roblox takes some of the blame. Stuff like this is primarily an issue with parenting. Just do not let your kid play any such game, what the fuck is wrong with you weaklings. People like this should not be permitted to have children in the first place.

Nonsense, not even 1% of gamblers are winning in the long run. What you wrote is the opposite of what actually happens. The longer you play, the higher the likelihood that you are going to lose. Winning big and being in profit is only possible in the short term due to variance in the randomness of results. Continuing to play long term means that the results will converge to the expected outcome, which is that the platform makes money and the player loses money. Just because a few cases of people exist that have managed to profit (allegedly, and not objectively proven) that does not mean that it "allows you to win the in the long run".

What is this "survive for a long time" supposed to mean? Slowly lose your money without going bankrupt very fast? If so, then yes that is possible for many and I agree with that.

That doesn't even make sense, how does someone lose a win? It is not possible according to the use of language to declare something like this. If you place a bet on something that is a win, you will win. There is no other possibility, anything else is made up nonsense.

It is not a game of skill and experience, and it is usually delusional addicts who believe this kind of nonsense. It is a game of random variance, nothing else and nothing more. Everything that comes into it, are just factors that have some influence on the variance but not that much. Nobody on this whole forum got rich from gambling, people are delusional.

This generic bullshit counterpoint could not be more wrong. The way that most merchants accept Bitcoin creates zero risk and it has zero relevance to them whether BTC will dump or not. The money is instantly converted to a stablecoin or fiat at the time of acceptance, therefore every merchant who is under the pressure of "risks" can adopt Bitcoin today this way.

Most fiat currencies are less stable than Bitcoin.

Wrong, using LN is extremely easy these days and much easier than using a bank app. If you don't know how to use something, that does not necessarily mean that the thing in question is difficult -- it could just be you that is stupid. The current state of some mobile and custodial LN wallets is that they could not get any simpler at all without completely removing Bitcoin from the equation, which would not make sense at all.

This sentence does not make sense. Rootstock's 300 TPS is tiny, and having "tons of other L2" does not create a case that confirms that their total capacities are sufficient for everyday money. It is entirely possible to have a "ton of other" L2s that have low capacity like Rootstock, and that they sum is insufficient. Instead, if you had actual knowledge on this topic you would understand that the Lightning Network is able to process millions of TPS without a known, objectively defined limit at this time. Therefore, LN alone is sufficient for everyday money.

The shitcoin Ethereum is extremely centralized and so is even L2 on it, don't make a false comparison here. The main L2 on Bitcoin i.e. the Lightning Network is completely decentralized, they are pure opposites.

Most do not have at least some of them, and if they do have them they tend to be often quite shitty. Some of the people that I have met, they have some of the worst possible girlfriends and wives imaginable. In cases like this, it is better to not have something than to have a rotten version of it.   You did write an interesting list because there can be tradeoffs that arise from acquiring some rotten versions of the others. Money that comes to a person without knowledge, skills, and other character traits that enable one to manage effectively such amount of money often leads to a variety of ruinous events. A bad wife leads to a massive decrease in peace, but so does often the money (even if you don't ruin yourself with it).

What kind of utter nonsense is this? Gen Z and younger generations are uneducated, unskilled and mostly useless due to their extreme consumption of digital content since their earliest years. Instead of learning skills and practicing mathematics, people from this generation are watching useless streamers and other brain damaging content. Do not blame the world for your own failures, this is entirely the fault of the people themselves and their own choices. The macroeconomic situation is not as good as it used to be in certain terms, but that is simply an influencing factor that has an impact on the difficulty level and not the outcome.

Anger is the solution for those that do not have better methods, but discipline remains supreme and then anger will not act as a weak source but it can come as a booster on top of the effective work that is already being done.

Most people do not live in shitholes like the UK and Iran, so nobody will actually come to "talk to you". You could not be more wrong. Many people have been red pilled with Bitcoin and against the system by their peers, they are living normal lives as if they had done nothing. The only time where you could get in trouble in a non-shithole country is if you managed to do this on a very large scale -- and let's face it, almost nobody is going to be doing that so it is not worth considering.

Wrong, you do not need transparency to be able to confirm that transactions are valid, that they are not edited and so forth. That was not the reason for which Bitcoin was made transparent.

Wrong, transparency is not needed in order to have transaction validity.

Models that do not have transparent transactions indeed come with different risk and security tradeoffs, but not for reason that you have written. You do not know why that is, so don't pretend that you do with generic posts about it.

Wrong, there are no Satoshi addresses in the whitepaper.

Wrong, privacy models are not based on these things. They are entirely different concepts, at least read the definitions before you write some nonsense about it.

He has done no such thing. The ownership of 1 million coins is primarily speculative, there is no proof for this.

I am the first and only user who left that shitposter a negative tag, I have done my part.

What exactly do you think that I can do about this? Unless they make me the sole member of the selection committee, my options are as limited and identical to yours. Have you tried to contact the campaign manager?

You are making assumptions about things which you can't know for certanity. Using the example of the user that you have provided, we can't be sure if that is another small fry who is simply utilizing the easy way to farm up accounts or it is someone who is part of a massive group of accounts. Similar to the case presented here, one can never be sure if the accounts that got connected are all of them or they are simply a subset of the total. Just because farming idiots make mistakes that enable people to connect their accounts, that does not mean that those mistakes were made on each account.

Furthermore, to conduct a large scale investigation in a maybe required a lot of effort and time. Why don't you give it a try? We've seen a decrease in the number of busted accounts in recent weeks, but the number of farmed accounts is quite up high. You can follow this by looking at newly opened signature campaigns, 90-99% of the users that apply are shitposters and farmed accounts.  

 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It is primarily due to a concept that is known as hindsight bias, poor, dumb and otherwise brain limited people easily get tricked by something like this which is why they come up with nonsensical claims of missing out on big wins. Nobody is missing out on anything. People who win are winners, people who lose are losers, and people who don't play are simply non-players. That is all there to is. Any kind of hindsight analysis is biased and nonsensical, there is no version of events under which something else would have happened.

It is not solely about emotions and a lack of control of emotions, it also relates to missing knowledge about the most basic definitions, concepts, and ideas. How many people are writing shit here that contradicts everything that hindsight bias stands for?  There are endless examples.

Sounds good, except that it is completely incorrect in reality. Practically nobody is winning every 6th bet with an average odds of 20. More likely, people are losing 50 bets of odds of 20 and then winning one or two and they believe that they can achieve something with this kind of result. 

Reviving this thread, a case example of neutral trust being a mistake. Massive farms are on the loose in every newly created signature campaign topic.

The accounts get woken up silently if they were dormant, and they hope that a manager will overlook the trust ratings in error or due to incompetence. This one has been trying hard to enter a signature campaign, some idiots even gave him merits.

This is unlikely. Were the lies something large, I would have pounced on it and tagged all those users. People may have just used BPIP wrong, or miscounted. In the early days I did not know how to check this and was manually summarizing my merits received too, and mistakes within that range are expected. It is good that you are watching it, but your conclusions in this case are wrong.

Yes it is true, read a book about basic statistics and how statements are made. The existence of exceptions do not invalidate statements. The governments are the biggest obstacles/enemies of Bitcoin. If they weren't, it would be widely adopted as legal tender anywhere. People are mostly sheep, they will obey what they are told. If the governments were to force Bitcoin worldwide, in a few years everyone would be using it.

The decisions of an individual do not create obstacles for the whole in this case. If you are using Bitcoin wrong, that does not have impact on anyone else except you. So you are not contributing to the "obstacles" for Bitcoin to become a daily method of payment. With every thing there are people like this. There are people who have bank cards just in case and they never ever use them unless there is no choice. Learn the difference.

Arbitrary and generic statements with no validity or data behind them. Bitcoin does not need to be accepted in any major economy for anything at all. Furthermore, a generic statement of "needs to be accepted" makes no sense at all. Bitcoin is already accepted by many merchants in the USA. There is no obstacle for individual merchants to adopt them, it is entirely up to them. Legal tender is another topic, but it does not need to be a thing unless the government is extremely pro-Bitcoin but that is completely different from "needs to be accepted".