Live data from Hacker News

Untitled topic

news.ycombinator.com

21–30 of 221 posts

Re: undefined

#21
post #14

Casinos enable gambling Addicts in the same way that legalized weed enables drug addicts.

I've read that the way gambling engages the dopaminergic system in gambling addicts is more akin to physical addictions like alcohol, tobacco, or opiates. So maybe a better analogy would be "in the same way freely available opiates would enable drug addicts". There often seems to be a sentiment of "Why congratulate a recovering alcoholic? I've never had a drinking problem so why isn't someone congratulating me." from…

The vast majority of opiates, substituted amphetamines, and cocaine were available OTC for a myriad of ailments. Many Vietnam veterans were treated in hospitals with heroin, yet they didn't become addicted.

What it boils down to is that the addict is unable to achieve homeostasis with their environment. Unfulfilling relationships (both romantic and platonic), financial burdens, lack of a job, lack of intimacy all contribute to addictive behavior.

It's easy to blame a particular molecule for ruining someone's life. It's less easy to blame a system that turns men into machines.

Re: undefined

#22
I wouldn't be against a law that prevented people from gambling large amounts of money unless they could prove the money was theirs. (ETA: whew, a quadruple negative.) The IRS could provide a form that confirmed that someone reported X amount of income, and you should only be allowed to gamble X-Y for some nominal value of Y. This wouldn't be that hard to enforce (the time isn't too significant when you're dealing with large amounts of money), and I don't think there's much public interest in being able to gamble unlimited amounts of money and keep it secret from the government.

Is there some problem with the above? Is there a compelling reason this would harm civil liberties that I'm missing? It's not worse than banning gambling altogether, and should prevent most embezzling or gambling borrowed funds.

Re: undefined

#23
I've worked at 3 gaming manufacturers including implementing the payout table. Near misses were never coded into the design. If they did occur, they were consequences of the way the reels were physically laid out. That choice was made from an excel sheet that outlines how many types of each award were expected. The primary statistics the mathematicians cared about were volatility (std deviation) and hold percentage. I can almost guarantee that no modern manufacturers have coded logic that says "If a loss was chosen, re-arrange the loss to appear close to a winning combination". There is no need to do that.

Also, virtual reel maps allow you to have wins over 10,000 units. That enables choice, some people might want to play a large-award machine. There is no deceit there. If the award says "8 million dollars", you know that winning symbol does not have a 1/22 chance of coming up. I have played megabucks, a progressive slot with a $10mm award, for a couple hours. I believe I got one winning megabucks symbol on the first reel, perhaps 4-6 times. That seems in line with its rough expected probability. No deceit. If the first symbol, and (!!) the second symbol came up with their true 1/22 probability, but conveniently the third symbol always missed, it might fool some people initially. But the people who play these machines often would figure it out and their gambler's superstition would kick in. They'd say "those machines are rigged, I've gotten 2/3 winning symbols hundreds of times but I never get the third. I wont play them anymore."

For anyone who is outright against all gambling, its important to remember that you will never shut it down. If you make it illegal, people will go online, or the mafia will have their "numbers" game, people will bet on sports through bookies, etc. The shadier the source, the dirtier it gets. I've heard of casinos in south america that had "inaugural wins", where they'd rig the machine to pay them the first time they sit down in order to hook them. That is sick.

The first reform I'd like to see is the $1200 tax limit increased. Thats an unfair tax on everyone, addict or not. It should be raised to account for the cost of living and inflation. I don't think it's been changed in at least the last 15 years.

Second, I think the optimal solution here is to legislate some sort of "gambler's bankruptcy", where someone surrenders their assets to a court, which then puts them on a forced budget and severely impedes their ability to gamble. That way it could perhaps prevent them from being homeless, sued, etc.

Third, I think that if you embezzle or otherwise use stolen funds to gamble that should absolutely be recoverable by the victim. If I buy stolen property, the court has no problem seizing that from me and returning it to its rightful owner. If the casinos sell entertainment and receive stolen funds, they absolutely should suffer the consequences just like an ordinary citizen. If they see a "whale" coming in and extend all these benefits to them, it should be their onus to verify that person's income.

Re: undefined

#24
post #22

I wouldn't be against a law that prevented people from gambling large amounts of money unless they could prove the money was theirs. (ETA: whew, a quadruple negative.) The IRS could provide a form that confirmed that someone reported X amount of income, and you should only be allowed to gamble X-Y for some nominal value of Y. This wouldn't be that hard to enforce (the time isn't too significant when you're dealing wi…

Well, the SEC [kind of] already does this with accredited investors :)

Re: undefined

#25
post #24
post #22

I wouldn't be against a law that prevented people from gambling large amounts of money unless they could prove the money was theirs. (ETA: whew, a quadruple negative.) The IRS could provide a form that confirmed that someone reported X amount of income, and you should only be allowed to gamble X-Y for some nominal value of Y. This wouldn't be that hard to enforce (the time isn't too significant when you're dealing wi…

Well, the SEC [kind of] already does this with accredited investors :)

Can you be accredited based on embezzled or borrowed money? Will it bring attention that will uncover it?

Re: undefined

#26
post #4

"and lost all of a $110,000 personal loan he’d taken out from PNC Bank." The man had no job, maxed out credit card, and a bank gave him a loan of 110k? Am I crazy to think this is insane on the bank's behalf?

No. Any bank with sane procedures would never approve such a thing.

Can you share more of your experiences working in the banking industry?

Re: undefined

#27
post #16

Great article. I have a Internet addiction and this is eerily similar. Like slot machines that pump random awards and chance into slot user, I feel the surge of social approval and dopamine rush too when I get a Reddit upvote, a Facebook Like, IG comment, Tumblr reblog etc. Also like how gambling addicts get into a "zombie flow-state" when they're one with the machine, I feel the same way scrolling through pages afte…

You are not alone. I feel the same way every now and then. The most obvious sign is when I catch myself typing the URL of the website I just opened right there again at the top. And then I go through my habits and get better internet hygiene. One such thing that helped was setting time limits or when I switched for instance to using Google Reader. Unfortunately google killed it, so I was lost for a while. Another tri…

I did the IFTTT daily digest dump to my e-reader, but ended up filling up the memory too quickly.

I've been using Google Newsstand recently, and it seems to work well in providing new content without sucking you down a rabbit hole. It would be nice to be able to add your own RSS feeds like reader though.

Re: undefined

#28
post #2

A really great short documentary on this subject is Louis Theroux's "Gambling in Las Vegas". His frank manner really cuts to the core of not only the length to which addicts will justify gambling but also to the lengths to which the casino employees justify their enabling. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJRYUZbxwyA

Thanks for sharing—my family was ripped apart due to my father's unbridled gambling. Although it's conceivable that casinos play their part in motivating people to gamble, much of the addiction is a battle within the individuals.

Re: undefined

#29
post #21
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've read that the way gambling engages the dopaminergic system in gambling addicts is more akin to physical addictions like alcohol, tobacco, or opiates. So maybe a better analogy would be "in the same way freely available opiates would enable drug addicts". There often seems to be a sentiment of "Why congratulate a recovering alcoholic? I've never had a drinking problem so why isn't someone congratulating me." from…

The vast majority of opiates, substituted amphetamines, and cocaine were available OTC for a myriad of ailments. Many Vietnam veterans were treated in hospitals with heroin, yet they didn't become addicted. What it boils down to is that the addict is unable to achieve homeostasis with their environment. Unfulfilling relationships (both romantic and platonic), financial burdens, lack of a job, lack of intimacy all con…

Maybe, although I do believe that tons of good science has chimed in on the role of dopamine in the human brain. Give a smoker some chantix without alleviating their financial burdens or changing "the system" in any way and watch how long it takes them to want nothing to do with cigarettes. There is a complex biological process at work here that plenty of smart people spend their entire lives trying to understand.

Re: undefined

#30

"and lost all of a $110,000 personal loan he’d taken out from PNC Bank." The man had no job, maxed out credit card, and a bank gave him a loan of 110k? Am I crazy to think this is insane on the bank's behalf?

My guess is that he took an equity loan on the house. Based on their website, PNC looks to be like most other banks as far as business model and services offered, so a plain ol' home equity line of credit makes the most sense.
Post reply on HN