Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Will Supreme Court open a ‘dam burst’ of legalized sports betting?

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 106 posts

Re: Will Supreme Court open a ‘dam burst’ of legalized sports betting?

#81

Post by mmirate »

Intermernet wrote: post #79
mmirate wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> your brother I lack siblings. > or my brother is innumerate You led with "maybe"; to keep my next sentence's structure from becoming a complete mess, I'll assume that your hypothetical is true. If some random person tells me "my brother is innumerate" ... then why should that information be of any consequence to me, in the absence of further context? EDIT: and by further context I mean further information about you…

The further context is that your brother could be harmed by gambling or lotteries. The information should be of consequence due to human empathy usually associated with family members and hopefully, also other humans in general.

> your brother

You mean their brother? Presuming so, then my next paragraph applies to this item also.

> other humans in general.

But who? I draw much different conclusions from a physician or a programmer or a chemist or etc, than from a hobo or an organized-criminal or etc.

Re: Will Supreme Court open a ‘dam burst’ of legalized sports betting?

#82

Post by School-Cotton »

orangecat wrote: post #9
Kalium wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking as an American, the choice in our society isn't between "voluntarily allow its citizens to be taken advantage of" and not that. It's between allowing gambling to be run by organized crime and creating a system that enables at least a modicum of accountability.

It's between allowing gambling to be run by organized crime and creating a system that enables at least a modicum of accountability. Organized crime would probably a step up from state lotteries.

State lotteries don’t murder people they have disputes with.

Re: Will Supreme Court open a ‘dam burst’ of legalized sports betting?

#83

Post by mmirate »

junkscience2017 wrote: post #70
jccalhoun wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On one hand, I can see this. Having worked in a casino, my gut reaction is, "If you are that dumb then you deserve to lose everything." But on the other hand, there is the societal good of not having people throw away their money and spend it on things like paying their rent/mortgage and healthcare and education and not be a burden to society.

Alcohol is factually poisonous to humans. Every day people die, become sick, lose jobs, destroy families, etc etc all due to this poison. The facts regarding alcohol are beyond question. Will you destroy all of your personal stock of this poison for the benefit of society and forsake it forevermore? If not, why not?

Oh, it's no doubt a mind-destroyer; that alone makes it quite scary to me, no need to contemplate its other effects.

And I'll gladly forsake it quietly, and let those with excess affinity for it, use it to destroy themselves if they so desire. We didn't need such weak people anyway.

Re: Will Supreme Court open a ‘dam burst’ of legalized sports betting?

#84

Post by LiamPa »

dchuk wrote: post #3

(Preface: I'm not particularly interested in the ethical debates around gambling with this comment, though I personally think it's something people should be allowed to do.). I've been slowly getting into Machine Learning for a while now, and have been looking for projects to accelerate my focus. I also happen to like to gamble (responsibly), so I've recently started researching how to apply Machine/Deep Learning to…

Nate Silver: Signal and the noise, Joesph Buchdahl: Squares & Sharps, Suckers & Sharks

I am heavily involved in gambling (trading), posted a simple article on using ML as well recently:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15739468

Feel free to join our slack group:

https://github.com/liampauling/betfair

Re: Will Supreme Court open a ‘dam burst’ of legalized sports betting?

#85

Post by jeffdavis »

junkscience2017 wrote: post #62
hug wrote: post #2

As an Australian, living in a society where betting is legal albeit fairly regulated: I sincerely hope not. The reason for that hope is that gambling and gambling advertising, with the rise of online betting sites and smartphone apps, has started to become a fairly genuine social issue. With advertisements like this one ( https://twitter.com/sportsbetcomau/status/863634984682233856 ) [note: Ben Johnson recently was f…

We allow daytrading, how is that different? We allow daytrading while you drink! Impaired daytrading! Soon in California you will be able to be under the influence of marijuana while you daytrade! If anything, I would like to see gambling completely in the open across the entire US. Prohibitions against it are a silly throwback. If you are an adult and want to spend your life savings on craps, go for it. If you lose…

Social safety nets mean that society bears some of the risk for your behavior, and thus has a strong incentive to restrict your freedom.

Re: Will Supreme Court open a ‘dam burst’ of legalized sports betting?

#86

Post by StanislavPetrov »

hug wrote: post #2

As an Australian, living in a society where betting is legal albeit fairly regulated: I sincerely hope not. The reason for that hope is that gambling and gambling advertising, with the rise of online betting sites and smartphone apps, has started to become a fairly genuine social issue. With advertisements like this one ( https://twitter.com/sportsbetcomau/status/863634984682233856 ) [note: Ben Johnson recently was f…

We already have widespread gambling. Betting on horse races is an American tradition, is legal in virtually every state both live and online. Lotteries are also legal in virtually every state and heavily promoted by the state on every medium. You can't watch a tv show or listen to the radio for more then a few minutes before hearing a jingle or an ad to get someone to "gamble" on the lotto (which has far, far lowers odds of winning than a sports bet). Much like the "debate" about legalizing online poker, the "debate" over sports gambling has far more to do with the already legal entrenched gambling interests trying to prevent any competition.

Re: Will Supreme Court open a ‘dam burst’ of legalized sports betting?

#87

Post by cm2012 »

mmirate wrote: post #83
junkscience2017 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alcohol is factually poisonous to humans. Every day people die, become sick, lose jobs, destroy families, etc etc all due to this poison. The facts regarding alcohol are beyond question. Will you destroy all of your personal stock of this poison for the benefit of society and forsake it forevermore? If not, why not?

Oh, it's no doubt a mind-destroyer; that alone makes it quite scary to me, no need to contemplate its other effects. And I'll gladly forsake it quietly, and let those with excess affinity for it, use it to destroy themselves if they so desire. We didn't need such weak people anyway.

Society doesn't need such callous people as you.

Re: Will Supreme Court open a ‘dam burst’ of legalized sports betting?

#88

Post by ggg9990 »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #49
sithadmin wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The phenomenon you're describing is a real conundrum (and it's an emerging issue in my home state of Texas), but at the end of the day can be settled by a more stringent state or federally-enforced definition of what qualifies as a slot machine, especially when it's fairly obvious that using replays of old sport events to determine payout is not at all the same thing as letting the outcome be settled by a random numb…

Or, the government could just butt out and let consenting adults gamble if that's what they want to do with their time and money.

What's your definition of consenting adult? A person with a gambling problem is about as able to give informed consent as a mentally retarded person.

Re: Will Supreme Court open a ‘dam burst’ of legalized sports betting?

#89

Post by CamperBob2 »

ggg9990 wrote: post #88
CamperBob2 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, the government could just butt out and let consenting adults gamble if that's what they want to do with their time and money.

What's your definition of consenting adult? A person with a gambling problem is about as able to give informed consent as a mentally retarded person.

That's a bit patronizing, don't you think? Have you thought about all of the other freedoms you could restrict based on identical reasoning? It's a very long list.

Re: Will Supreme Court open a ‘dam burst’ of legalized sports betting?

#90

Post by Spooky23 »

junkscience2017 wrote: post #64
Spooky23 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its a nasty addiction that’s been layered with a veneer of legitimacy.

I'm sorry but this really isn't true. This isn't tobacco, where people become addicted and then industry lies about the health implications. Everyone who gambles understands that sometimes you win and sometimes you lose, and if the casino lost more than they won, it wouldn't be a casino at all. No one is told they will always win. True, there is manipulation , but all advertising is based on manipulation, as is most…

It is.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-the-brain-get...

Post reply on HN