... I don't know if I should even bother, if you can't tell the difference between spending money on chocolate (you can buy enough chocolate to last you a year for $500) and spending your life's savings on a fraudulent online casino. Gambing addictions are a reality; chocolate addictions are not, I'm sorry to say.warpus said:
Whats wrong with online gambling?
- Thread starter Bozo Erectus
- Start date
JerichoHill
Bedrock of Knowledge
warpus said:
Well, we outlawed drugs, and are close to outlawing smoking. Maybe we can bring back prohibition too, because that really worked wonders! And let's ban caffeine too because its addicting.
Maybe we should hold everyone's hands so no one makes a "mistake".
Parentalism stinks.
Whatever happened to letting persons be responsible for their own actions? When did we need a babysitter again?
EdwardTking
Deity
Gambling has always attracted organised crime.
Do people think that internet gambling is exempt from that?
There has been ferocious arguments as to people cheating when
playing multi-player Civ. And that is when there is no money at stake.
When you play poker, do you know where every card in the pack is?
Not unless you are a cheat.
But how can you know that your opponent does not know where every
card in the pack is?? What proof can you have that the game is straight??
Do people think that internet gambling is exempt from that?
There has been ferocious arguments as to people cheating when
playing multi-player Civ. And that is when there is no money at stake.
When you play poker, do you know where every card in the pack is?
Not unless you are a cheat.
But how can you know that your opponent does not know where every
card in the pack is?? What proof can you have that the game is straight??
Masquerouge
Deity
JerichoHill said:
I understand regulating (maybe not outlawing) things that can bring second-hand damage, like smoking in public places.
I'm stronly against outlawing things that only "damages" you. If you wish to experiment every know drug on yourself, feel free to do it in your home, or in an appropriate place. That's not my concern, and it's your money, your body.
Now there is a stigma on gambling. It is true that gambling was once in the hands of organized criminal rings, and thus you could rightly fear having a gambling joint in your neighborhood.
However, internet gambling pretty much gets rid of that. Once people realized that a lot of money was to be made in gambling, it was only a matter of time before "regular" companies took care of it. The beauty of on-line gambling is that you don't even have to cheat or rob your clients, you make a ton of money as is! Why would an on-line gambling company risk lawsuits and inquiries by doing some stupid things like credit card fraud or card shuffling when it simply has to take a little percentage of its clients' earning to be hugely profitable?
So to me on-line gambling is not as much associated with thugs and mafias than any regular company. For this reason, I do not see why it should be made illegal or heavily regulated...
Of course, I'm not discussing gambling as a sin, because I truly hope religious issues have no say in the matter. (yeah, I'm utterly naive)
JerichoHill
Bedrock of Knowledge
Okay,
I've been a poker player for years. I'm mid-way between the professional level and the amatuer level. Won a few tourneys here and there of substantial size. What could possibly explain the fact that I win more often than I would by chance alone? Variance can't explain it, because over time variance would equal zero.
Firstly, one cannot say "always". Semantic argument, appealing to emotion. "Usually, Often, Sometimes" would be more apt. Next.
Secondly, I also played blackjack. I can count cards. The basic system of counting cards is High/Low. While we cannot know each card in the deck, we can make a very good guess as to when the deck is stacked in our favor, and bet accordingly. It's mathematics here people.
In poker, particularly the popular Texas Hold'Em of today, the house provides the cards and table and chips, and the players provide the house with a rake for hosting the game and allowing them to play. This is akin to a sports bar charging admission to watch a game, or a club charging to get into the door. Once you're in, its you and everyone else.
Now, onto the last sentence. The fact that I can't provide proof of such doesn't mean that the game isn't necessarily straight. The absence of proof is not proof of absence (science here people). Besides, it is in the best interests of the hosts (who receive the rake) to ensure that the game is as "transparent" as possible, by changing decks every so often, changing dealers, and punishing cheats when spotted (I have seen two guys dragged out of a poker room for cheating so far). The best houses for poker are the ones that provide such a service. The basic fact that such behavior on account of the poker rooms is profit-maximizing for them tells me that theyre on the up and up.
Now, back to poker. Poker involves 3 elements. The first is math. Each card represents a mathematical probability of winning. Each 2 card hand (texas holdem) has a certain probability of winding up the winning hand (but each hand does not have the same probability). The probability will depend on the hand one has and the number of players at the table. On the Flop, River and Turn, other cards are exposed allowing the player to make a hand. Again, it is probability and math at work here too.
The second element of the poker game is the psychological component. Most everyone has certain tendencies, and over time, one picks up on them. This is an informational battle, and the player most adept at reading other's signals is at an advantage. This is the 2nd skill element and much harder to master than the 1st (math). But psychologists will tell you that we as individuals have patterns of behavior.
The third part of the game is luck. This is what cards you are dealt, and what cards show up on the Flop, Turn, and River. This cannot be controlled.
If skilled (pros) are winning at a rate higher than pure chance would otherwise have them, then poker must be a game that involves some skill, and therefore is not wholly a "game of chance"
It is illogical and unscientific to assume that absence of proof is proof of absence.
I've been a poker player for years. I'm mid-way between the professional level and the amatuer level. Won a few tourneys here and there of substantial size. What could possibly explain the fact that I win more often than I would by chance alone? Variance can't explain it, because over time variance would equal zero.
Firstly, one cannot say "always". Semantic argument, appealing to emotion. "Usually, Often, Sometimes" would be more apt. Next.
Secondly, I also played blackjack. I can count cards. The basic system of counting cards is High/Low. While we cannot know each card in the deck, we can make a very good guess as to when the deck is stacked in our favor, and bet accordingly. It's mathematics here people.
In poker, particularly the popular Texas Hold'Em of today, the house provides the cards and table and chips, and the players provide the house with a rake for hosting the game and allowing them to play. This is akin to a sports bar charging admission to watch a game, or a club charging to get into the door. Once you're in, its you and everyone else.
Now, onto the last sentence. The fact that I can't provide proof of such doesn't mean that the game isn't necessarily straight. The absence of proof is not proof of absence (science here people). Besides, it is in the best interests of the hosts (who receive the rake) to ensure that the game is as "transparent" as possible, by changing decks every so often, changing dealers, and punishing cheats when spotted (I have seen two guys dragged out of a poker room for cheating so far). The best houses for poker are the ones that provide such a service. The basic fact that such behavior on account of the poker rooms is profit-maximizing for them tells me that theyre on the up and up.
Now, back to poker. Poker involves 3 elements. The first is math. Each card represents a mathematical probability of winning. Each 2 card hand (texas holdem) has a certain probability of winding up the winning hand (but each hand does not have the same probability). The probability will depend on the hand one has and the number of players at the table. On the Flop, River and Turn, other cards are exposed allowing the player to make a hand. Again, it is probability and math at work here too.
The second element of the poker game is the psychological component. Most everyone has certain tendencies, and over time, one picks up on them. This is an informational battle, and the player most adept at reading other's signals is at an advantage. This is the 2nd skill element and much harder to master than the 1st (math). But psychologists will tell you that we as individuals have patterns of behavior.
The third part of the game is luck. This is what cards you are dealt, and what cards show up on the Flop, Turn, and River. This cannot be controlled.
If skilled (pros) are winning at a rate higher than pure chance would otherwise have them, then poker must be a game that involves some skill, and therefore is not wholly a "game of chance"
It is illogical and unscientific to assume that absence of proof is proof of absence.
garric said:
Geez, 2, 3, and 4 could be used against internet porn, too. Even 1, if you consider silicon enhancements to be a form of fraud.
Though come to think of it, Evil Conservative Republicans would be nodding and saying "Yup, internet porn is next on our agenda."
garric said:
You don't think Hugh Hefner built those mansions himself, did you?
ChrTh
Happy Yule!
IglooDude said:
Yeah, but that was *before* the Internet. Someone (might've been Bill Simmons) wrote something like this, and I thought it was genius:
It's 1986, and someone says to you that 20 years from now we'd have flying cars, you'd probably believe them. If they told you that all diseases would be cured, you probably would believe them too. If they told you that in 2006 porn would be available easily, everywhere, and for free, you would've said they were nuts.
...and now we're thoroughly off-topic. I for one support gambling in all its forms. Heck, I think getting up and going to work is a gamble.
Bozo Erectus
Master Baker
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 22,389
Fact: The Republicans control the Congress. Fact: If this legislation passes, it will be because the Republicans want it to.garric said:
Thats easily said. I say they arent, so there.
Gambling isnt illegal in the United States. On what grounds do they prevent Americans from gambling?
The same could be said of bars. Should bars and pubs be shut down because underage people occasionally sneak in and drink?
Prevent addictions?
Why then is tobacco legal? Why is alcohol legal?
ChrTh
Happy Yule!
Sorry, Bozo, I can't let this pass (although I agree with you otherwise):
They ARE shut down for that. Happens all the time. Granted, it's temporary, but they're still punished for the infraction.
They ARE shut down for that. Happens all the time. Granted, it's temporary, but they're still punished for the infraction.
Bozo Erectus
Master Baker
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 22,389
I know, but what Im saying is this: should all Americans be prevented from going to bars, because there are some bars where underage people have had drinks?ChrTh said:
ChrTh
Happy Yule!
Bozo Erectus said:
Ok, that I can get behind.
Bozo Erectus said:
The point being, if this was done by the Democrats you would be supporting it.
Proof?
Last time I checked it is. People arn't even allowed to BET on Sports. The only places that casinos are allowed to be built are in Las Vegas and on sacred Native American lands.
There are ways to regulate that, by checking IDs and looking at the man's face. On the internet, you are completely anonymous.
These addictions are not nearly as disastrous as wasting all your money at a fraudulent internet casino. People who smoke and drink can and do live normal lives, a gambing addict DOES NOT.Prevent addictions?
ChrTh
Happy Yule!
Atlantic City is a sacred Native American land?!? 
ChrTh said:Atlantic City is a sacred Native American land?!?
"Resorts International became the first legal casino in the eastern United States when it opened on May 26, 1978."
These things are highly regulated; you can not build a casino anywhere you want. Perhaps my original assertion wasn't complete, but I stand behind my decision to say it.
garric said:
Sorry, we're not all blinded by party affiliation when deciding on issues.
garric said:
Is horse racing a sport? Or dog racing? Or jai alai?
Besides, "gambling" happens in most states, in the form of lotteries and scratch tickets. Fortunately those are legal because the money goes to our government coffers instead of untaxable foreign website owners.
Bozo Erectus
Master Baker
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 22,389
Im just going to let that slide, because you clearly havent read many of my posts over the last couple of years. If you had, youd know thats not true.garric said:
You dont get it
The point I was making is that its very easy to say something like "Online gambling is crooked" or, "Online gambling isnt crooked". Youd better check again. As far as I know, every state in the union has many types of lotteries, and horse racing, and all sorts of gambling.
Thats not true.
The lands are so sacred they build casinos on them?
Since when? The lack of online privacy is one of the biggest problems online.
Thats your opinion, and Id wager a large sum of money that you arent a psychologist or any other type of mental health professional at all.
PrinceOfLeigh
Wigan, England
Showing my ignorance now but what gambling is legal / illegal in the States? Does it alter from State to State?
You can bet on anything over here. Including the weather. Or if Micheal Jackon's sister is actually Micheal in drag. You get better odds for that than the lottery
You can bet on anything over here. Including the weather. Or if Micheal Jackon's sister is actually Micheal in drag. You get better odds for that than the lottery
Because the United States doesn't have jurisdiction just "anywhere"?garric said:
Flak
vBülletin Förum
I'm an engineer that works for a large gaming company in the gambling industry.
That's fine if that's how you feel. And if society want's to support a prohibition on all gambling, go for it!
But the fact is that this particular law does not ban all gambling and it's not meant to be a 'good start'. It's aimed at banning some types of online gambling so that other types of online gambling can be profitable. The senators backing this law are funded heavily by those online operators which the law specifically allows to exist. In other words, it's an attempt at a big money grab.
This is completely wrong. Gambling is a state-by-state issue. The feds only involve themselves in regulation, not prohibition or allowance. And even in their regulation duties, they are very hands off, usually only going in when some things might have gotten out of control.
It's also obvious you haven't 'checked' anything at all. My company does big business in atleast twenty states, most notably Nevada, California, Mississippi, Louisiana, New Jersey, Oklahoma, New Mexico and Iowa. Each of these states have their own laws regarding how we do business in their state or on their tribal land.
No the Federal government does not have any such laws, except regarding federally owned/managed land. Those powers not specifically given to the Federal government can be assumed by the states. And the states decide if and where a casino can be built in their state. These is true for tribal land within state boundaries as well. This is also true for all types of gambling, not just casinos. However the internet is an entirely different creature which crosses all borders. Nobody is really sure how to deal with this right now.
My own opinion on this: The bill will fail. It's ridiculous anyway. Allowing gambling almost always promotes more gambling all around. If you are running any business, no matter what the industry, and you have to rely on government prohibition of fair competition to stay in business, then you should really take a hard look at your business model. Chances are, you aren't going to succeed no matter what you do. There should be even more warning flags going up if you have to buy senators and congressman to even get your prohibition laws on the floor. Not good.
EDIT: Looks like I stuck my foot in my mouth a bit. This garbage 'law' actually passed the House of Congress by a huge margin! They just might be able to end online gambling as we know it. Perhaps the days of illegal gambling are nigh upon us.
Enkidu Warrior said:
That's fine if that's how you feel. And if society want's to support a prohibition on all gambling, go for it!
But the fact is that this particular law does not ban all gambling and it's not meant to be a 'good start'. It's aimed at banning some types of online gambling so that other types of online gambling can be profitable. The senators backing this law are funded heavily by those online operators which the law specifically allows to exist. In other words, it's an attempt at a big money grab.
garric said:
This is completely wrong. Gambling is a state-by-state issue. The feds only involve themselves in regulation, not prohibition or allowance. And even in their regulation duties, they are very hands off, usually only going in when some things might have gotten out of control.
It's also obvious you haven't 'checked' anything at all. My company does big business in atleast twenty states, most notably Nevada, California, Mississippi, Louisiana, New Jersey, Oklahoma, New Mexico and Iowa. Each of these states have their own laws regarding how we do business in their state or on their tribal land.
garric said:
No the Federal government does not have any such laws, except regarding federally owned/managed land. Those powers not specifically given to the Federal government can be assumed by the states. And the states decide if and where a casino can be built in their state. These is true for tribal land within state boundaries as well. This is also true for all types of gambling, not just casinos. However the internet is an entirely different creature which crosses all borders. Nobody is really sure how to deal with this right now.
My own opinion on this: The bill will fail. It's ridiculous anyway. Allowing gambling almost always promotes more gambling all around. If you are running any business, no matter what the industry, and you have to rely on government prohibition of fair competition to stay in business, then you should really take a hard look at your business model. Chances are, you aren't going to succeed no matter what you do. There should be even more warning flags going up if you have to buy senators and congressman to even get your prohibition laws on the floor. Not good.
EDIT: Looks like I stuck my foot in my mouth a bit. This garbage 'law' actually passed the House of Congress by a huge margin! They just might be able to end online gambling as we know it. Perhaps the days of illegal gambling are nigh upon us.
Similar threads
