There are ways to cryptographically verify bet integrity, but that’s not important. The point I was trying to make is that people should have the right to make their own decisions, even if you disagree with them, even if they’re objectively wrong.
There are ways to cryptographically verify bet integrity, but that’s not important. The point I was trying to make is that people should have the right to make their own decisions, even if you disagree with them, even if they’re objectively wrong.
I presume you don’t consider yourself to be a part of the aforementioned majority? Do you believe it makes you superior? Do you believe you know better what’s best for them? Do you believe you must protect them from themselves, even at the cost of their self-determination?
Who’s “they”? I don’t know much about the gambling industry but if it’s anything like any other industry then it’s not a centralized monolith but many independent business. As long as the founding principles aren’t inherently corrupt (and in the case of casinos they aren’t. Nobody is forced to play and everyone knows the house has an advantage and in the long term is guaranteed to win. Because of this it doesn’t make sense for the house to cheat and risk getting caught, it will win anyway.) there is no reason to think that the majority of the industry engages in criminal activity. This is a massive generalization.
Why are online casinos bad? I don’t understand this pervasive need some people have to force their way of life on others and take away their agency over their own lives. It comes off to me as some kind of superiority complex. “They’re too stupid to make their own decisions, I know better what’s best for them, I must protect them from themselves”.
That’s just not true. Monero, litecoin, bch… transactions cost less than a penny. No one uses bitcoin for illegal things anymore (it’s tracable and forever on the blockchain, people use monero instead) but if they were wouldn’t that mean bitcoin is useful for exchanging goods?
I use crypto for a bunch of legitimate things like paying for my VPN, phone bill, donating to foss projects etc.
I use it because it’s more private, faster and more convenient for me. I can always have it with me, use it from any place, any time, for anything I want with no hidden fees and no one can seize, freeze, track or control my money. If you think that thoes things are valueable only to criminals you must have lived under some 1st world rock for a while.
I use crypto to privately pay for my VPN, phone bill, to donate to foss projects. I sold some digital items online for crypto. I use it because it’s faster, more private (if done correctly) and convenient than using a credit card or bank transfer. No one can seize, freeze, or control my crypto. I can donate, pay or get paid on my own terms with no middle man. If visa, mastercard, banks or fintech companies generate value then so does crypto.
What’s the difference between a useless cryptographic token and a useless piece of paper if there are people willing to give me things I want for either?
And people bash brave for being bloated.
It’s pronounced “xits”.
Because available spots in colleges are limited in order to give to one group you have to take away from another, it’s a zero sum game. I don’t know what the right answer is but I know that treating asian kids worse because they are asian isn’t one. I also don’t belive that kids should suffer for the sins of their grandparents.
Like I said I don’t know what the right answer is but I think offering scholarships to talented, hardworking kids who can’t afford to pay for school, regardless of race is a better solution than race based preferential treatment.
So why would you want to do the same thing again, just to a different race? Two wrongs don’t make a right.
I guess being treated better/worse because of the color of your skin is equality.
For every good thing they do 2 bad things come next. The grass is always greener on the other side.
What a save!
Undertale?
kirby?
Yes, my comment wasn’t about online casinos but about the people who think they have a right to tell others how to live their lives. I’m not defending the gambling industry, I think gambling is stupid. I’m defending the right of the people to make their own decisions.
My “defense of the gambling industry” was just me pointing out that as long as something isn’t inherently nonconsensual and the terms and conditions are clear there is no reason to forbid other people from doing it just because you disagree with it.