Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment Your Rights Online

Nevada Lawmakers Nearer To OK'ing Net Betting 102

Posted by timothy from the so-immoral-the-state-has-to-run-it dept.
jyuter writes: "Nevada has approved in theory to license on-line gambling sites. It will probably take a while for them to actually start licensing since they need (among other things) "resonable assurences" that the vendors can prohibit minors. One lawyer even suggested "biometrics" or a fingerprint scan to detect minors, or GPS to determine if the person playing is in a legal state." The word "spoof" keeps hurling itself across my line of sight. (Should the state get to charge people $500,000 every two years for operating a business without toxic waste? Talk about a barrier to entry!)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nevada Lawmakers Nearer To OK'ing Net Betting More

Nevada Lawmakers Nearer To OK'ing Net Betting

Comments Filter:

  • Re:Bad for compulsive gamblers (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Yes and no. Tobacco products are available anywhere though, and tobacco usage is everywhere too. Quitting smoking (yes, I did too)is a little different than quitting gambeling. While some types of gambeling are just as available as tobacco, (lottery, horse tracks, etc.) casino gambeling for most people presents logistical challenges. Unless you live near Vegas, Atlantic City, or an Indian casino, legal casino gambeling is not quite as convienent as a Marlboro. And unlike smoking or drinking, online gambeling is easier to hide from family or friends. So yes, legal online gambeling may pose new challenges to recovering gambling addicts.

    Having said that, I could really care less if this goes through. I'm not a gambler, I seriously doubt this will make me a gambler. My point really was just that to "avoid those sites" for a gambeling addict presents different logistical situations for most people.

  • SHould the state... (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    ...be able to charge $500k every two years for businesses that don't generate toxic waste?

    Sure... how about state costs for in-state gambling addicts, state costs for any lawsuits such a law could entail, etc.

    Depending on your point of view, both of these involve "toxic waste", if you think that addicts in general are weak and deserve their self-imposed fate, or that lawsuits only really benefit lawyers and/or their results can generate "toxic waste" in a metaphorical legal sense...
  • Plus, existing taxes and regulatory fees for brick and mortar casinos are also quite high. Nevada charges these high fees because it provides the best service. The regulations actually help everyone; the state's reputation for clean games and fair play keeps visitors coming and the casinos profitable. It's good for business, it's good for visitors, and it's good for the state.

    I don't doubt for one moment that the mafia runs the games, or that the regulators know that. My take on it is that the legal, fair games are nevertheless so profitable that the mafia wants in. It's really quite clever; they've created a way for dishonest greedy people to make money legally and honestly. I really miss living in Nevada...they have a great attitude there.

  • I'm a Nevadan, though I'm in exile at the moment . . .


    The mob is gone. Oh, there are a couple of old mob figures around, but they're impotent these days. They just weren't able to survive the publicly traded casino--it has no kneecaps to break, etc. This weakened them enough that gaming control was able to mop up.


    These days, they're only around as comic relief--the occasional news story as some 70 year old hobbles up to another's driveway, leaning on a cane with one hand while shooting with another, over some slight from the past.


    while I'm at it, this is a bad idea. Las Vegas is *not* in the gambling business. It's in the fantasy business; gaming is just part of the fantasy. You step off the plane and enter an alternate world for 2 days, a week, or whatever. Destination gambling is fundamentally different than local gambling, which is predatory in nature.


    hawk

  • Not just an impractical solution, but who in they're right mind would give up their fingerprints (and have them put into a database) just to gamble online? (Hell, I choose where to live based on whether that state requires fingerprints for drivers licenses--i stay away from those states.) Especially when you could just go to an offshore site where they don't care.

    I was suspecting something along the lines of your dirty fingers joke--they would do it based on fingerprint size. But clearly there are adults with small fingers and children with big fingers, so that couldn't be all that useful. In the end, I think some people were thinking of gee-whiz technology that really offers no solution.
  • > my $40 in gambling money is purchasing me a
    >few hours of fun at the blackjack table

    My goodness, you must be a good player, and lucky! Last time I was in a casino, $40 would
    have played TWO HANDS of blackjack.

    I couldn't believe the $20 and $50 minimums at tables, and that there were no $5 tables!
    This was at a riverboat in Mississippi, but
    I've seen a similar in Shreveport. I realize
    if you live in Vegas you can still find $2.00
    blackjack. I live in AZ but haven't checked out
    the Indian casinos.

    I don't care much for gambling places. I like the games themselves, but I don't like the depressingly mundane (yet garish) surroundings.
    The "entertainment" in those places is always
    meant to appeal to one or two previous generations.

  • Net Gambling... (Score:3)

    by mattkime ( 8466 ) on Tuesday June 05, 2001 @10:21AM (#174801)
    I've been gambling on the net for quite a while now.

    I'm on my third DSL provider.

  • And I'd stand in line to buy a (second) USB hub.

    This also promises to add new meaning to the term 'daisychaining'.

  • I'll bet... (Score:4)

    by msouth ( 10321 ) on Tuesday June 05, 2001 @10:50AM (#174803) Homepage Journal
    ...that anything I say with a subject like that will be modded up as funny!

    Whaddya say, moderators? C'mon, eleven!

    :)
    --
  • >Who would put serious money down on 100000:1 odds?

    Millions of people all over the US do exactly this every week on odds that are significantly worse.

    It's called the lottery.

    (and most casino gambling games have odds far better than 100,000:1. the odds of being dealt a straight flush in five-card stud (or the first round of cards in five-card draw) poker are only about 65,000:1, and that's a phenomonal hand)

    -LjM

  • Heh heh. Everyone remember: You're not a whore if you do it for FUN! The karma is just a side-benefit.


    ---
  • No, I'm just saying msouth exhibits a healthy lust for literary satisfaction. Revelling in pleasure does not a slut make.
    ---
  • Aren't there online IDs that you can get to prove you're an adult? Fingerprint scanning seems pretty far out - who's gonna go spend money on the scanner so they can spend more money? Plus, I'll be interested to hear from the first script kiddie to winnuke the server (since you KNOW it's gonna be NT). I think this is a pretty horrible idea for the gamblers (it'd be so easy to stack games for the casinos) - plus, those with gambling addictions are in a casino even when they're not in a casino - that can't be right, can it?

    If you think you know what the hell is going on you're probably full of shit. -- Robert Anton Wilson
  • Should the state get to charge people $500,000 every two years for operating a business without toxic waste?

    Well, they haven't been able to get the online buffets working properly...
  • In the US, it's not 'illegal' per-se to make bets. It's illegal to run a book. You cannot sit there and take bets from people. Online gambling is HUGE, and *anyone* with a credit card an an Internet connection can already gamble and bet on sports. The only news is that the servers/business offices will be able to be in the US rather than having to run offshore. The high barrier to entry just means that only the rich can get into the business. If you want to go offshore, anyone with a hundred grand can get into the sportsbook business; the only hard part is the marketing.
  • Tax. Period.

    There is already a *large* international online gambling market. The only thing *any* jurisdiction gets out of not permittiong 'online' gambling in their state/country is to force prospective businesses to leave the country to somewhere they can run their business legally.
    It makes it makes it no easier or harder for someone to gamble online. It's just as convenient for you to gamble online now as it would be if Vegas was doing it.

  • I guess Nevada has really loose/forward (take your pick) "moral" laws.

    It seems that the majority of live adult sites in the US orginate out of NV.

    An extra thought: If prostitution is legal employment in NV, could the state force wellfare mothers into prostitution if they couldn't find some other form of employment?

    --
  • Unfortunately, my faith in many kids today understanding the necessary math, which would lead most people to stay away from gambling, is low. Imagine the class on gambling. First they show the terrible odds of any gain, but then say, "All the taxes we collect on gambling are great. We get the taxes then pay it out to people in social benefits so people can continue to gamble".

    Gambling is good! - This message brought to you by teachers whose salaries and future pay raises are tied gambling taxes.

  • You are right. I live in Maryland, which is run by people who claim to champion the poor/middle class (whatever they define that as). On the other hand they have no problem trying to convince those same people to part with the few dollars they have and buy a lottery ticket. It is really twisted.
  • What most slashdotters seem to not realize is that online gambling has been around for quite a while and is only becoming more common.

    The big problem right now is that it's difficult for the common man to tell which of the online "casinos" are truly credible. Most of the casinos are in off-shore havens (Carribean, Central America), and there's no effective way to tell if you've been cheated. (Sorry sir, back luck on drawing that virtual 5 of spades!) On top of all of that, many people have reported problems getting payouts from certain organizations. If you lose, your credit card is debited. If you win, you may or may not see a check in three to four weeks.

    The point of all of this is that Nevada gambling would at the least be regulated, accredited, and relatively trustworthy. There's so much money to be made from legal forms of gambling that none of the big players would risk their license over trying to cheat.

    Is online gambling an evil? Maybe. But Nevada online gambling is a lesser evil.
  • The "correct" way to say Nevada;

    Ney-va-tha with the "th" said with a lisp.

    If you speak Spanish that is.
  • I just couldn't throw my computer into the trash. The net betting thing is hard to implement and verifying via GPS isn't feasible considering the I might feel like playing while I'm not in a legal state. The commerce/verifying etc is what's going to be hard. More power to them for trying but I don't think it's going to be easy as they claim.
  • If they taught gambling in schools the gambling industry would be out of business. The odds of you winning any money when you step into a casino are slim and if you do win money the feelings of ambition are going to outweigh your common sense. Unless you're obviously doing it all for fun. Also there are certain games like poker, blackjack etc that don't require that much of statistical math skill. It's more about technique and the way you play the game against an opponent.

    Gambling can be very wholesome fun especially if you love losing money. You're more likely to be hit by a run away truck who's driver broke out of a federal state prison on a military base, than to win gambling in casinos.
  • > If you want to bring real probability theory in, you can even show that with even odds but differences in fortune (bank has infinity for all practical purposes, you have xxx USD), the bank is also guarenteed to win all your pennies. So even with even odds, your chances to win are smaller than the banks, let alone with several greens and maximal bets.

    Actually, he did. "What are the green squares for?" was replied with an example along the lines of "Suppose you doubled your bet with every spin of the roulette wheel (and there were no green squares), every time you lost. You'd be guaranteed to win. The problem is that if you double your bet every time, you've gotta have more money than I [Dad, playing the house] do. The green squares make sure that even a guy with a million bucks can't try this."

    Of course, we did it out with pen and paper and "real numbers" ($2, $4, $8, $16...) instead of exponents, but the effect was the same.

  • >If they taught gambling in schools the gambling industry would be out of business.

    Amen.

    Actually, I have fond memories of my Dad teaching me (at age 7-8) how to play poker, blackjack, and roulette.

    After spending some time taking my pennies, we both noticed that he was doing well, and so he started teaching me why the house always won. "Daddy, what are the green numbers on the roulette wheel for?" is actually a pretty natural question for a seven-year-old.

    So we switched sides, and I played the "house" in blackjack and roulette the next time. All of a sudden, my "luck" changed and I "won" my pennies back. And he taught me that luck had nothing to do with it. If you play enough hands and have an advantage, you will win. And the rules are set up so that the house has an advantage.

    Was it real probability theory? Not really. But when a kid's just discovered fractions, it's pretty easy to show him that 18/38 is less than 18/36. If betting on black/red is like flipping a coin, it's a fair game. Except that two out of every 38 spins, the coin is designed to land on its edge.

    Since then, I've gone to casinos and had plenty of fun. But I've always gone in with cash, and with the notion that my $40 in gambling money is purchasing me a few hours of fun at the blackjack table - in the same way that the same $40 could purchase me few hours of fun in a bar, at the movies, or at the arcade.

  • >I think I get your point, but there is no 12 in a deck of cards.

    But the computer said there was! ;-)

    Actually, I was aiming for (+1, Funny), but someone could get an easy (+1, Insightful) by pointing out that what I just described as "preposterous, who'd be dumb enough to play cards when you can't see the cards being dealt and you don't have the source code of the algorithm that deals the cards?" is exactly what players of VLTs (Video Lottery Terminals) and electronic slot machines are doing right now in the real world.

  • > I don't doubt for one moment that the mafia runs the games, or that the regulators know that. My take on it is that the legal, fair games are nevertheless so profitable that the mafia wants in.

    Hey, what's wrong with the mob?

    Compare the payouts on the mob-run "numbers game" in with the payout ratio of the government-run lotteries. The mob offers better odds, according to what appears to be expert testimony on the subject:

    SOURCE: Q&A session on the National Gambling Impact Survey [ngisc.gov], March 17, 1998

    MR. KARCHER: --but I'm told every major gaming site where there's enough employees to have a numbers, a meaningful numbers game played at a work site, it's preferable to a lottery because the payout is better. The payout is always constant in an illegal lottery and the illegals numbers game, the games that were played -- first of all, the illegal numbers game were never able to go into lotto because there was never enough sophistication so it's always just been a three digit game, the numbers business. And on job sites or in factories it is still played and the payout remains constant.

    Whereas, in, as I understand it, the three digit game is a function of how many people have that number so the payout can be as low as two or three hundred dollars. Is that correct? At least it is in New Jersey. In other words, if you played the numbers illegally you would get a $500 payout no matter what, out of 999 numbers. If you had that number you would get a $500 payout, whereas you might run the risk in a legal lottery, a legal numbers game of being paid out only two hundred and some odd dollars or three hundred and some odd dollars. So, I'm told that some people still prefer to play the old fashioned game.

    Given the choice, it looks like the mob offers a superior product in the gambling market. Which reminds me, both the government and the Mafia have programmes whereby they offer "protection" you didn't ask for in exchange for "protection money" you have to pay. Both have the power to see that Bad Things Happen to you if you don't pay up. What's the difference, really? (There are days when I think the only reason the government fights organized crime is because it can't stand the competition ;-)
  • > I couldn't believe the $20 and $50 minimums at tables, and that there were no $5 tables!

    (Yeah, it was Reno, and they had a $5 table. I could hack a $20 minimum with $100 to play with, but anything beyond that is out of my league. It stops being fun when it's about real money. If I wanna do that, I'll play the stock market :)

    > I like the games themselves, but I don't like the depressingly mundane (yet garish) surroundings. The "entertainment" in those places is always meant to appeal to one or two previous generations

    You have a gift for understatement :)

  • Awright, online blackjack! (Score:5)

    by Tackhead ( 54550 ) on Tuesday June 05, 2001 @10:19AM (#174824)
    You have:
    Four of Hearts, Seven of Clubs.
    Dealer is showing:
    Unknown card, Six of Diamonds
    Will you: Hit, Stand, or Double-down?

    (Double-down)
    Host: dealer.casino.nv.us contacted...
    18K read (at 943 bytes/sec)

    Player draws: Twelve of Clubs.
    Player has: Four of Hearts, Seven of Clubs, Twelve of Clubs. Total=22.

    Player Busts.

    Dealer draws: Ace of Hearts.
    Dealer stands.
    Dealer turns over unknown card: Four of Clubs.
    Dealer has: Four of Clubs, Six of Diamonds, Nine of Hearts. Total=21.

    Dealer wins.

    Wager again? Yes/No.

    ("Aaw, shit, again?!?!?! I always draw a twelve when I'm winning!")

  • Which reminds me, both the government and the Mafia have programmes whereby they offer "protection" you didn't ask for in exchange for "protection money" you have to pay. Both have the power to see that Bad Things Happen to you if you don't pay up. What's the difference, really?

    Actually, there are several differences. The Mafia doesn't insist on knowing every detail of my finances, as long as they get paid. The Mafia doesn't care what chemicals I may choose to ingest in private. And I don't think even the Mafia could pull off as huge a pyramid scheme as Social Security.

  • Quitting gambling and smoking is easy. I do each several times a year.
  • Should the state get to charge people 500,000 every two years for operating a business without toxic waste? Talk about a barrier to entry!)

    Yes... It takes alot of money for the government to regulate that industry, and there is alot of potential for people to be riped off if the government doesnt keep it fair.
  • I quit smoking this year... Having tobacco products for sale online does not make being near a computer any more "dangerous" then normal for me. They just need to avoid those sights like they avoid the casinos and OTBs

  • Not to mention that the definition may be unclear.

    If I'm in a resident of one state, but currently away on a trip in another, whose law applies? Would the strictest rule apply -- and more importantly, how would the Nevadans know my *physical* location without, say, a court order for ISP logs?

    Interstate gambling would be interstate commerce. I'm pretty sure that the Feds believe they have jurisdiction over this, and they could make a strong case because gambling *is* commerce. And for now, the Feds are saying "no" to the whole shebang.
  • A CNN article [cnn.com] says that the state will not only collect rather hefty fees annual licensing fees, but also 6% of the gross income.

    For comparison, if memory serves the House percentage on a standard 38-number roulette wheel is only 5.26% on the "best" bet (from the bettor's point of view), betting on a single number at 35:1 odds. A slot machine -- hrm, some are around 11% and probably upwards.
  • I wonder if this is in response to the fact that what used to be thought of as "betting" is now making its way into business schools [opensecrets.org] and the mafias just can't stand the idea of losing yet another aspect of their monopolies.
  • I keep hearing "spoofing" more and more from the non-technical, although they have no idea what it means. Unfortunately we had a CTO who, whenever anyone mentioned security, would say "We're not going to be spoofed," so now our CEO has to ask about it all the time....

    Packet sniffing seems to be making its way around as well, and is equally misunderstood. Maybe it's the familiarity with words like "spoof" or "sniff" that's helping them make the rounds, but either way it's getting annoying.
  • it's always good to start your responses with the word "wrong." it makes for good discourse.

    and yes, you are misinterpreting :] my point was that spoof is an older word, and rather friendly to boot, which is why it sticks in people's heads. kind of like "sniff," my other example, which is also very friendly and commonly used.

    8th grade graduation was indeed very nice, and one of my fondest memories -- getting out for summer vacation, heading home, getting into a little 12' brockway skiff and cruising through the saltwater creeks... it was almost as nice as when i got my bachelor's, although it certainly didn't do me as well in the job market :]
  • Hello?!?!

    Moderators?

    WTF just happened here?

    --

  • If it's on the net, minors will find it and gain access to it. Any kid that's reasonably determined will be able to find his way in - have they not learned this by now?

    Ok, so you have biometrics. Get a piece of tape, take your parent's fingerprint off their cereal bowl. Big deal.

    The point is, the net affords a certain level of anonyminity to its users, and no matter what protection measures they implement, there's no way to stop everything.

    This is asking for some BIG legal battles.
  • On the contrary, I watch almost none at all. But my point is that it can't be too hard to fake the fingerprint of someone you live with, especially since you leave fingerprints all over the place. It's just a matter of being clever enough to do it.
  • This is really a bad news for all gambling addicts. Most of them can manage not to go near a casino, but with that even being near a computer could be "dangerous"..

    Too bad for them. Maybe they could learn some self control.

  • Picture a boatfull of poor people shoving all of their money into slot machines.

    Those people are throwing all their money away gambling for the same reason that they are poor. Be it unintelligence, irresponsibility, mental illness, or other problems. They no more deserve to be "protected" from the chance to gamble than they deserve to have high-paying jobs despite their lack of skill/dedication/responsibility

  • But why should Nevada care if it is accessed by people from other states? It isn't our responsibility to make sure that the rest of you abide by your own states laws

    Because they don't want the feds fucking with their cash cow.

  • Found $500,000 in couch... (Score:3)

    by Greyfox ( 87712 ) on Tuesday June 05, 2001 @12:29PM (#174840) Homepage Journal
    I used to do programming for dog tracks. VictoryLand, while I was working there, would average $1.5 million a week. Birmhingham made about $1.8 million its opening night (Breaking a record.) Gulf Greyhound Park in Texas broke $2 Million its first night, a week after Birmingham. $500,000 every 2 years all of a sudden doesn't sound like so much...
  • I don't think ease of accessibility has anything to do with it. If a person is addicted to gambling they will find a way to gamble - no matter the effort required.

    It could take those who currently gamble for fun and make them become addicted. But that's simply a personal restraint issue. We all know better, but few of us care enough to restrain ourselves. If they truly want to become addicted then it does not require on-line gambling to do it.

  • Yes, I do see what you mean now that you've explained it a bit more. The temptation is now greater to fire up and gamble.

    I still think there are ways to circumvent this, though. Put a sign on your monitor that says "No Gambling". Avoid web sites that have gambling adverts (I know, hard to do). Use your computer for a specific purpose (play Starcraft, code, make a web page, do the family finances) not random entertainment (surf the web).

  • This is really a bad news for all gambling addicts. Most of them can manage not to go near a casino, but with that even being near a computer could be "dangerous"...
  • If a person is addicted to gambling they will find a way to gamble - no matter the effort required.

    It's not about those who want to gamble, it's for those who want to stop. Most can manage not to go to a casino, but with billions of banner ads saying "clink here to gamble", it's going to be a lot harder for these people not to gamble. If it takes you 30 minutes to drive to a casino, you've got plenty of time to reason to turn back, but if all it takes is two clicks, it becomes a lot harder.

  • Re:Bad for compulsive gamblers (Score:3)

    by jmv ( 93421 ) on Tuesday June 05, 2001 @10:41AM (#174845) Homepage
    There are two differences here. First, you can buy cigarettes online, but you cannot "smoke online"... and since it's more complicated online than going to the nearest store, online sale of tobacco is not making things any worse for you. Online gambling *is* making things worse.

    The second important differences is the implications. If you smoke, you're mainly hurting yourself (sure there's secondary smoke, but it's not that important). If you're addicted to gambling, you're hurting your whole family (as in losing your house, ...) as much as yourself.

  • Gambling online... (Score:3)

    by Zaphod B ( 94313 ) on Tuesday June 05, 2001 @10:06AM (#174846) Journal

    Nevada already has such a favourable tax climate for business due to the casinos that the relocation of would-be online betting parlours to the state could have a very beneficial effect on the existing, non-betting-oriented businesses, particularly in booming Clark County (home to Las Vegas and Henderson, the fastest-growing collection of ugly tract homes in the world).

    The question is not whether Nevada will legalise online gambling, but whether this legality will stand when the inevitable challenges happen in Federal court.

    As for minors getting in to online gambling illicitly... the way most casinos are set up now could be used as a model:

    • Random ID checks involving driver licenses or other government-issued ID
    • Requirements for proof of age before 'cashing out'
    • Requirements for proof of age before 'entering' (i.e., before setting up an account).

    If nothing else, they could use an age verification system as they do on porn sites.

    OTOH, 13-year-olds with too much time and money on their hands vs. the authorities and their slow reactions, especially programmatic reactions...'tis no contest whatsoever.


    Zaphod B

  • Ever heard of video poker?

  • This was just on CNBC... apparently the assumed front runner for doing the security development took off today on the news despite the fact that this is at LEAST a year or two out and that there's no guarantee that they'd be the company that most people used.... Gotta love that market.
  • "Ok, so you have biometrics. Get a piece of tape, take your parent's fingerprint off their cereal bowl. Big deal. "

    Dude. You watch WAY to much TV.
  • Oh great.. Another USB attachment.. I don't have any ports left!
  • I'm sure any online blackjack site would make sure the rules were in their favor. It's trivial for them ot just reshuffle after every hand. Even if they don't go that far, they can use far more decks than in a casino and have very weak little penetration. This would be especially necessary since it's so easy for anyone playing at home to use some card counting program and just punch in the cards as they are dealt. It could always tell them the optiumum play.
  • Do you have a link to the CNBC article?

    -----------------
  • The net betting thing is hard to implement and verifying via GPS isn't feasible considering the I might feel like playing while I'm not in a legal state.

    Are you saying that verifying via GPS is not technically feasible (cannot be done because the technology does not exist) or that it is too much hassle for the users/administrators?

    Addressing your desire to gamble online while not in a legal state, that would be the whole purpose of incorporating GPS into the authentication solution. Even though you might reside in Nevada, you cannot legally gamble while traveling in a different state. The Federal Interstate Commerce laws declare that interstate wire gambling is illegal. GPS can be used (and should be) by the online gambling sites to prevent illeagal access by "out of towners".

    -----------------
  • Nevada is not trying to license gambling sites in other states. Federal law says that interstate gambling is illegal. If you want to place a bet with a legititmate sports betting establishment in Nevada, then you must physically be in Nevada when you place that bet. You cannot call from New York to place a bet on who will win the Stanley Cup.

    For an online sports betting page to be legally operating in Nevada, they must be able to prove to the gaming commission that all bets placed on their site originated from with the state of Nevada.

    Other states that wish to implement online casinos, sports betting, etc. have the same burden of proof. They must be able to show that an online wager was placed from within the same state as the online wagering establishment.

    That's my story, and I'm sticking to it!

    -----------------
  • shoot, where are my mod points today!?

    ---

  • It can be true that gambling promotes logical thinking, but there are several types of "gambling" that doesn't require people to bet money. There is no way I can accept that minors should be allowed to gamble themselves. If they want to exercise their mind with game theory, give them boardgames or roleplaying games, teach them bridge and chess, but IMO minors gambling about money only spell trouble.
    There is a definite need for monitoring, but how this shall be accomplished, I don't know. And how long before someone cracks whatever protection system they come up with? Anyway, that's my two cents.
    /Smuffe
  • wrong. "Spoof" isn't a new word -- so you have it backwards; in fact, it's one word you can *directly* blame on the "popular culture," and its specialized use in computer security etc. is an application of its long-held meaning to a particular circumstance.

    Dictionary.com (fount of wisdom for we poor spellers) says "Sometime in the 19th century Arthur Roberts (1852-1933) invented a game called Spoof, which involved trickery and nonsense. The first recorded reference to the game in 1884 refers to its revival. It was not long before the word spoof took on the general sense "nonsense, trickery," first recorded in 1889. The verb spoof is first recorded in 1889 as well, in the sense "to deceive.""

    You seem to have a certain, context-specific meaning stuck in your head. Fine. Words can have lots of context-specific meanings (check out the word "punk" for instance -- "The punk lit the punk, punk!"), but by having special meanings in some small corner of the world, they don't lose their larger, more general meanings.

    In the context of this article, it would be entirely accurate to use the word "spoof" to describe a user faking age or location to get around the restrictions NV would like to impose.

    Whether that's (morally) right or not is up to you, but jeesh, why the knee-jerk reaction? Hope you had a nice graduation from 8th grade, sorry about how you always got picked on, why take it out on people with a middlin' vocabulary?

    simon

    p.s.: Unless I misinterpreted what you were trying to say here, in which case forget it and laugh it off. :)

  • Right! ;)

    OK, I give! Sorry to start out like the Comic Book Guy from the Simpsons, that was uncivil and uncalled for. Someone else in this same thread (can't find now -- moderated too low?) seemed to say exactly what I *thought* (falsely) that you were saying, and I had a little knee jerk reaction of my own. (You should have seen my response before I tried to make it non-inflammatory;))

    Mea culpa, and I apologize for the 8th-grade crack. I rather liked getting out of 8th grade myself (not a bad year, except for math class, really, but boy did I have some bad teachers), though you had a better vacation afterward from the sound of it.

    Cheers and humility,

    simon

  • Offtopic nitpick...

    Should the state get to charge people $500,000 every two years for operating a business without toxic waste?

    Just because computers do not emit any waste while they are running, that does not make them "green". One has to consider their impact on the environment in other ways. It takes massive amounts of energy and all kinds of nasty materials to produce electronic equipment. It also takes a fair amount of energy to run and cool those computers, and that energy does not come from clean sources (yet). Then there is the issue of disposal and waste when perfectly functional machines are typically sent to the landfill. Fortuneately some companies are stepping up to the plate to handle this issue, but most people simply toss that old computer and monitor.


  • I've been gambling on the net for quite a while now. I'm on my third DSL provider.

    Just some advice: Never bet on Verizon. You'll lose every time. (I had to learn that the hard way)

    -----
  • ...they essentially legalized gambling in the entire frikkin' planet?

  • Entry fee (Score:4)

    by gughunter ( 188183 ) on Tuesday June 05, 2001 @09:59AM (#174862) Homepage
    The $500,000 fee is to ensure that only serious, committed Mafiosi with a proven customer service track record can get involved.
  • How can you license a site which does not operate within your stae? I mean, if you have an online gambling site in Texas and Nevada wants to charge you for licensing then how are they going to enforce it?
  • > Besides who the hell is going to want to play
    > blackjack with an 8 year old? ;-)

    Depends. How much cash has he got?

    Chris Mattern
  • considering that the anti-minor detection is far from feasable, I don't think we'd have to worry about that. Although, this is VERY Good news for Nevadan's like me. this will provide yet ANOTHER stream of revenue for our State government. And subsequently justify not having a state incometax =)
  • Get this. There's an entire CERTIFICATION process to become a prostitue. So I guess that's out of the question. BTW, Nevada banned Gay Marriages because people would think that it would make the state look Immoral and Filthy. you figure it out, because I can't.
  • Hey, why not...I mean I can/could take my kids (if I had any) to the dog track any time I wanted...last time I checked that was gambling. And what about the churches!!! Just think of the money^H^H^H^Hdonations they could get if they turned their Bingo halls into casinos. Never mind the fact that Bingo is gambling already.

    Jaysyn

  • I have to say: what's all the fuss about? We have online betting here in the UK, in fact the government recently lowered gambling taxes to dissuade people from betting using off-shore services. I'm known to occasionally have a little flutter on the Grand Prix myself (except you Americans and your CART racing seem to have led JP Montoya into bad habits since his amazing performance in F3000).

    Anyway, don't most states in the US run a lottery? In what way is this not gambling?



    --

  • Fingerprint scans to detect minors ?? (Score:3)

    by Rosco P. Coltrane ( 209368 ) on Tuesday June 05, 2001 @10:07AM (#174869)
    Unless NV maintains a fingerprint database, how can they determine who's a minor and who's not ? they'd have to ask those who want to gamble online to come to an authorized "fingerprinting bureau" in Nevada to register and give their fingerprints. I can't see that being a practical solution.

    Or maybe they want to detect dirty fingers to identify teenagers ...

  • Well, the great thing about blackjack is that (if you can count cards), it's the only casino game that's tipped slightly in the player's favor. Playing online means that you could have another system sitting next to you (or another program running) telling you exactly what to do based on the cards that have already come up.

    Getting the basic "when to hit / when to stand" rules down is pretty easy, it's the card counting stuff that most novices have trouble with.

    I figure that because of this the casinos would offer this game under normal Las Vegas rules...

    -S
  • I dont get it! W(hy)TF! should nevada have the exclusive license for online gambling?

    Screw that. I think people should open up shop out of country - and continue to break the "law" on this one.

    I dont see why the people of the US continually let .gov stomp on all things sensible. Why are we debating overthe 500K entrance fee. we should disagree with this entirely - but by not seeing/acknowledging the fact that .gov is taking one step closer to cutting our freedoms off at the neck, by regulating/licensing/owning the rights to peoples inherent need for escapism/addiction/thrill (entertainment/cigs/drink/drugs/etc..).

    we are not getting anywhere - we just look at this as "oh well - looks like nevada is closer to holding the monopoly on gambling"

    that is a big deal. what if you start an online gambling.cash site outside US borders. you can be punished for having US citizens use your site - or it is blocked, or you have to pay NEVADA 500k.

    fuck them.

    sorry for the rant....
  • Now if only they could come up with a way to proliferate prostitution over the web!
  • With phone, it's rather easy. 1-800 numbers can be: National, State only, or National (But not the originating state).
  • As Adam Sandler would say (In "The Uses of the Word Fuck") "Fuck the fucking fuckers!"
  • Programmers have proved for years that they can get their games to 'cheat'. Many of them substitute 'cheating' for difficulty levels rather than improving the game AI. Who's going to trust these guys NOT to cheat? At least in a real casino you can WATCH them pull your card off the deck. Would you play blackjack where the dealer was behind a screen and handed you a card from behind there? Of course not. Same thing here. I'm all for the concept of e-gambling, but there would need to be some SERIOUS assurances that everything was on the up-and-up. I'm thinking open-source casino software.
  • If you want to bring real probability theory in, you can even show that with even odds but differences in fortune (bank has infinity for all practical purposes, you have xxx USD), the bank is also guarenteed to win all your pennies. So even with even odds, your chances to win are smaller than the banks, let alone with several greens and maximal bets.

  • Honestly, people treat the latest tech so differently from everything else, since, well, um, it's new. Employers do this all the time - phones are usually unregulated tools, wheras computers need to be regulated, monitored, etc.

    It comes down to this (IANAL, of course):

    Is it OK to place a bet over the phone from another state that doesn't allow gambling?

    If yes, then go to reasonable lengths to secure ID, etc., if not, I don't see how a computer connection is any different from a phone connection. You're in one state, completing a transaction in another state. It's either OK or not, regardless of whether you use the web (or at least should be, IMHO).

    I'm over hnyah, and you're over hnnyah.

  • I'll bet anyone that this passes. Come on, anyone! I don't care if you're twelve, just grab mom and dad's credit card and let's bet! Chicken!

    I'm gonna make a fortune.


    Murphy's Law of Copiers

  • What about US states or maybe entire counties where gambling is ilegal ? will Nevada be able to block the network trafic coming from these places ???

    Doing this would require a lot of work, because it requires cooperation between all part involved.

    Theres the financial issue too. Here in Brazil all kinds of gambling is illegal, and according to the law one doesnt have to honor gambling debts, so if a brazilian looses he/she doesnt have to pay. are they prepared to deal with this kind of situation, or with misuse of credit card numbers ?

    Im asking this because I dont feel this idea of biometrics or GPS will ever work. The idea of having a GPS unit or biometric scanner sent to every gamblers house is ridiculous...

  • What garbage! Gambling is a tax on those not good at math. For every one person that wins, scores of people lose. That means the winners are taking advantage of other people's misfortune. Not a very nice thing to do. The only mitigating factor in gambling (for the most part) is that the losers are generally not forced to participate.

    Letting minors participate in gambling is simply unwise, from the casino's point of view. Minors are not responsible for contracts they sign, and can not be forced to pay any gambling debt they incurr. The casinos will do their best to insure that the only folks who play are folks whom they can legaly contract with.

    As for getting kids to attend school by letting them gamble... well, I just don't know how to experess the utter lunacy of that idea without appearing to be insulting or judgmental.
  • Why shouldn't minors be allowed to gamble?

    The same reason that minors aren't allowed to drink, drive automobiles, buy weapons, etc. Minors are basically shorter, dumber, versions of adults. There are certain hazards and risks that children need to be shielded from until they've developed an adequate understanding of the subject. Besides who the hell is going to want to play blackjack with an 8 year old? ;-)

    And if you don't think that gambling is dangerous - try standing in an elevator and overhearing a 20-something couple try to figure out what to do about losing $8000. It's a real eye-opener.

  • ...ok, so now Nevada is making some nice on-line gambling. If it is not legal to gamble in the state you are in, even though it is on line, how the hell does this work?

    oh well... I've got more important things to concern myself with...

  • I can't think of why does this story should be in this category, unless we're celebrating great strides in the right to take advantage of people who aren't as smart as you are. At any rate, I hereby announce my own lottery. Send me $1, and there is a small chance that I will send you $20 million.
  • I just spent half an hour searching through the U.S. Code [findlaw.com] for the prohibition on interstate gambling, and the couple of things I found that talked about wire transmission were only about sports or horses. I recall seing a broader prohibition, but it's not coming up on that search engine, so maybe I recall incorrectly.

    If Nevada allows the game, and your state allows the game, then federal law isn't involved, even though the games are coming over a wire. Even in the case of sports bets and betting information, which are spelled out clearly as illegal to transmit over interstate wires, there's a loophole for transmissions to and from states that permit that kind of sports betting. Intervening states can't stop it.

    Of course, the Internet is pervasive, and completely insecure. If people in Atlantic City can log into video poker machines in Las Vegas, then so can the 12-year-old h4xx0r son of a Mormon Elder's Wife Number 9 in Salt Lake City, in between Jenna Jameson tapes and shots of Herradura.

    --Blair
  • Sorry about that link.

    Here's the non-safewebbed link to the
    FindLaw.Com [findlaw.com]: Laws: Cases and Codes [findlaw.com]: U.S. Code [findlaw.com]: Keyword Search [findlaw.com] page.

    --Blair
    "-1: Doofus."

  • a) It is in the casino's interests to have restrictions on minors. If you are under 18 you are not legally bound to a contract, so their parents could sue to get any money the kid lost back. Of course, if the kid wins noone is going to find out. So it is lose/lose for the casino. Not to mention the bad press. b) As a Christian, we generally don't like gambling not because it is "the work of the devil" but because it generally takes the money of those who can least afford it. Yea, sure, your educated and understand probability. But gambling (especially state lottos) takes the money of poor uneducated people who don't understand probability. Personally I don't think the government should be in the gambling business. And I think that it is OK to restrict gambling to Vegas and Atlantic City. I mean, if you have enough money to gamble it shouldn't be a big deal to travel to do it. And if your so addicted to gambling that you need to do it constantly, you need help.

  • I just took a trip and drove across Nevada. I'm still not used to seeing slot machines in gas stations and now they want to put them on the web! Imagine all that noise in office's across the country.

    I suppose the casino's are licking their chops at the chance of people across the country playing 21 through their servers or rolling virtual craps... Imagine the BSOD right after a "roll."

    ---

  • Why not even have a gambling class in school?

    As long as there are multiple choice tests there will be lessons on gambling in school!

    ---

  • What the hell are you smoking? People have serious, serious problems with gambling. You ever been to Vegas? It's addictive. You see someone win big, you think "I can do that too." And trust me, that feeling has nothing to do with statistics. Keep the casino's in Vegas, thanks, where if you're gonna gamble your money, you're making a conscious effort to get rid of it all, instead of making it a habit at work, or something to do when you're bored.
  • ...online betting, which in recent years has been vilified as "the crack cocaine of gambling" by opponents like Kyl, R-Ariz.

    Can I get an extention to Godwin's law stating that one who uses "the crack cocaine of..." in their argument also automatically loses said argument? The whole crack cocaine being more addictive, yadda,yadda has been debunked, so why not put the saying where it belongs, ie, the garbage

  • Unless there's some wacky tax thing that I don't fully understand, the State doesn't pull any tax dollars off of gambling online. No State revenue from gambling is a Bad Thing (tm). Want an example, take Hwy 50 going east out of Fallon. Last time I was down that way, the road was in a horrible state of disrepair. If these online casinoes start to crop up all over the United States, then the Great State of Nevada could stand to lose millions annually. Legal gambling in other states = bad.

    First off, Re: Hwy 50 - It's a US highway, which means it has been shafted since the interstate highway system stole all the money from the rather efficient US highway system. Gambling money has little to do with this, you need to talk to your congress person about that problem.

    Second off, Re: "unfairness" - Tough shit. Your state has had an unnatural advantage right now due to the scarcity of legalized gaming, your state hates indian gaming, and screams when nearby states think about allowing more gaming permits. Which means if there is legalized gaming in other states, we finally have equality and fairness.

  • gambling not bad (Score:4)

    by physics major ( 325363 ) on Tuesday June 05, 2001 @10:00AM (#174892)
    I see no reason why gambling should not be universally accepted. Why shouldn't minors be allowed to gamble? Gambling fosters an intense devoition to math, which more of our students and young children need. It also teaches them an appreciation for money - they have to save some of their allowance to spend on other entertainments; they cannot gamble it all away. A game of cards is the best teacher for statistics. Some people believe gambling is a tool of the devil, or a satanic ritual, or even an addictive habit. Those of us who are enlightened and know the truths about Darwin, and social habits, and the Bible, are not stumped by these elaborate christian winged throwbacks. Why not even have a gambling class in school? I hope Nevada puts all its casinos on the web. The casinos I've been in are all wholesom family centers of enjoyment. Yes, there are sections of scantly clad women, but you just have to keep your children away from there. Gambling could be just the thing we need to get our children interested in school, science, and economics. I'm all for it!
  • Unless they can figure out how to ship me the kick-butt $3.99 buffet they have.
  • As a resident of the Great State of Nevada, I can't see how this could be a Good Thing (tm) for the state. Nevada gains the brunt of its revenue from tourism, with mining running a tight second. Now, people don't exactly come to the Silver State for the monochromatic landscapes and exotic florae and faunae (woo sagebrush!), they come for the gambling (and legal hookers ^_^, except in that lame-ass Clark county, you guys suck).
    Unless there's some wacky tax thing that I don't fully understand, the State doesn't pull any tax dollars off of gambling online. No State revenue from gambling is a Bad Thing (tm). Want an example, take Hwy 50 going east out of Fallon. Last time I was down that way, the road was in a horrible state of disrepair. If these online casinoes start to crop up all over the United States, then the Great State of Nevada could stand to lose millions annually. Legal gambling in other states = bad.

    Nevada has no "W" in it, so stop pronouncing it like it does. Nevada != Nuh vaw duh

Slashdot Top Deals

Love may laugh at locksmiths, but he has a profound respect for money bags. -- Sidney Paternoster, "The Folly of the Wise"

Close