watoc

If you need to experiment with k8s locally it's pretty easy to install Kubernetes in one or 2 VMs on your laptop with kubeadm but then you need to install Docker inside this VM. Minikube is also installing another Docker daemon inside their own VM.

Because I already have Docker for Mac installed to be able to build and test images I think it's useful to have this local k8s integration.

I've never noticed this issue with the stable version. However I'm experiencing high CPU usage whenever I start minikube on my Mac.

I just installed Docker edge. We'll see how it goes in the long run but so far with k8s enabled hyperkit uses 25% of a virtual core.

There is a query parameter "m=1" at the end of this URL. I guess that's why it wasn't marked as duplicate.

It's difficult to trust that Microsoft claimed it when you only provide a link to iota website.

If South Korea bans exchanges in the country or at least restrict their operations that could have a major impact. It would still be easy for Koreans to trade one crypto for another but much more difficult to exchange crypto for USD or any other currency.

They can keep track of the transactions until the hacker converts the Bitcoins to a more anonymous cc like Monero then it's pretty much over.

Futures on Bitcoins will be introduced next week on CBOE and the week after on CME.

I wonder if we will still see this kind of crazy rallies as it will be easier to short it.

And no insurance company (understandably) wants to fully cover Bitcoins.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4099912-coinbase-insurance-...

There might very well be other addresses used to transfer the stolen Bitcoins.

Shouldn't they try to maximize their profits overall and minimize their risk at the same time rather than try to maximize profit for each of their clients individually?

Interesting.

You say: "The bookmakers don't care - you've helping get turnover up, and they know increasing turnover through the market is the best way to get balanced liabilities."

And then: "1. Bookmakers will eventually end up closing their accounts, because winners are never welcome long-term."

Is there any rational behind bookmakers not welcoming long-term winners?

It seems like a bookie is very similar to a market maker on the stock exchange. Why would a market maker care if an investor makes money as long as he can flatten his positions every hour or so and make profit with the spread.

Isn't it accurate to say that bettors are competing against each other and the bookie is just taking a fee for making the market?

That's fine.

Although the strategy works here because the bookie moves the line to make it more attractive to bet on it. If he does not care about balancing the book, why move the line? He could just keep increasing his exposure

If they imbalance the book yes. But in this case the authors got the statistical edge because the bookie is trying to balance the book. What difference does it make if the $10k the bookie needs at 4/1 to balance the book comes from professional better Bob or from long term loser Joe? As soon as the book gets imbalanced again they would have to change the lines again.

Makes sense.

But then they are depriving themselves of liquidity provided by these professional gamblers. They might have to increase the odds even more so that an average joe will bet on an unpopular team where as the professional bettor would have taken it at a lower price recognizing the statistical edge.

The aim of the bookie is to have a guaranteed profit on each and every game. Whereas the professional gambler tries to make a guaranteed profit over multiple games. Seems to me that they can benefit each other rather than be against each other.

I don't totally understand why the bookmakers would limit their accounts.

The bookmaker wants to balance his book for each game to make sure he makes a profit no matter what the outcome is. To balance their books they might give better odds for an outcome than what a statistical model might suggest.

But what difference does it make if the bettor who helps them balance their books is a consistent winner or not?

Do they prefer to give these "good" odds to people who are losing money long term?