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

FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

espn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 232 posts

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#161

Post by bharris62 »

freditup wrote: post #149
mdpopescu wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or 82 billion, or trillion... yes, I would expect them to go out of business. Same if they made a mistake that killed someone, for example. As others have said, what if the client (or they kid!) had made the bet online and entered a few extra zeroes (and lost) - would they have accepted "I made a mistake" as an excuse and canceled the bet? You should not encourage a business to have a "head we win, tails you lose" po…

But a client entering a couple extra zeroes is not a clean and obvious mistake. A person could reasonably bet either $5 or $500 for example. On the other hand, offering something like a 1000x payout for an event that has a 50% chance of happening is a clear and obvious error. If an error is egregious and obvious, it seems reasonable that a company (in this case FanDuel) not honor the deal. Similarly, say a grocery st…

I am pretty sure that would fall under pricing error laws,and at least in California, they would have to honor it.

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#162

Post by CNJ7654 »

drfuchs wrote: post #155
barking wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm fine with welching, thanks, been using it since long before anyone suggested to me it might have origins such as you infer. In fact since you're the first person I've known to be offended by it, then unless you're Welsh, I suggest you take a break from virtue signalling, it's really boring. Never heard the term gyping until you mentioned it though.

Sure, back when I was a kid, both were in common usage, and I used them freely and unknowingly into adulthood. So, I was quite taken aback to belatedly learn of their etymology three decades ago. I'm happy to hear your data point that "gyp" may already have fallen into disuse; or did you mean that you now intend to start using it now to signal your non-PC-ness? If so, others that I recall hearing in childhood but not…

It seems like a bit of a stretch to assume the idioms someone uses can reliably indicate their moral character. As with anything, granting people the most charitable interpretation of their actions can go a long way. Is the person using the term gyping actually showing their hatred for the gypsies? It's not impossible, but that's not a very charitable interpretation of their actions

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#163

Post by rhcom2 »

barking wrote: post #159
drfuchs wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, back when I was a kid, both were in common usage, and I used them freely and unknowingly into adulthood. So, I was quite taken aback to belatedly learn of their etymology three decades ago. I'm happy to hear your data point that "gyp" may already have fallen into disuse; or did you mean that you now intend to start using it now to signal your non-PC-ness? If so, others that I recall hearing in childhood but not…

One thing we can be sure of is that trying to direct the language people use is a sure fire way to provoke a reaction. That goes for your ridiculous request for me to not use the word welch in the sense that i used it. If it had an association with the Welsh people that's long since been lost and I say that as someone who's lived on the border with Wales.

I think most adults are fine with hearing, "hey that word comes from a bigoted place" and replying, "oh I had no idea, I'll try to use a different word in the future."

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#164

Post by iends »

EpicEng wrote: post #135
iends wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may be surprised to learn that software bugs put companies out of business. They also can kill people.

I'm certain I wouldn't considering I've spent my entire career in cancer diagnostics and finance. This is a completely reversible mistake and no one was harmed in any way (feelings don't count). Let's not go off the rails and start making Therac-25 like comparisons. This isn't some abstract problem; the issue is well defined, so let's stay within the realm of reason.

Do you also think bugs in HFT code should be able to "undo" their mistakes instead of losing lots of money?

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#165

Post by dkrich »

pweissbrod wrote: post #16
wccrawford wrote: post #3

And yet, you can bet that they'd collect if the error were in their favor. And they probably have. Absolutely disgusting.

I mildly disagree in the sense that what constitutes a "palpable" error is just too broad of a grey area. It would be encouraging to see FanDuel just cough up the erroneous wager (which is surely cheaper than a lawsuit) and tighten down the definition of errors in spreads to something more specific such as anything outside like 2 standard deviations within the scope of a game* *I'm not a gambler just someone who beli…

They would probably rather pay this out and have it go away instead of being a widely circulated ESPN article and potentially still losing in a lawsuit.

I think the reason they won't is they don't want to set a precedent for future similar mistakes. If they pay out here they would almost certainly lose future similar disputes in court.

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#166

Post by tomtheelder »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #104
tomtheelder wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure it is already a high priority, but it is a system built by humans, and it will always have mistakes. What if they were being forced to pay out 82 million instead of thousand? What about 82 billion? There should be clear cut laws surrounding clear errors, like there are in most places, and ones like this should not be forced to pay out.

When SCADA software fucks up and runs a ship aground someone has to pay. When something breaks because some engineer relied too much on FEAs and didn't do any destructive tests someone has to pay. "Whoops, our bad" is not an acceptable excuse except in tech.

"Whoops, our bad" is actually a valid excuse in virtually every industry, as long as your mistake doesn't cause damage that needs to be repaired. Such damage is the only reason anyone has to pay in the situations you described.

This situation is much more comparable to, say, ordering something from a store that turns out to be out of stock. The store has to refund you for the sale, of course, but that's all they are on the hook for. They aren't punished beyond that, they don't even have to go out and find the item for you.

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#167

Post by barking »

rhcom2 wrote: post #163
barking wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing we can be sure of is that trying to direct the language people use is a sure fire way to provoke a reaction. That goes for your ridiculous request for me to not use the word welch in the sense that i used it. If it had an association with the Welsh people that's long since been lost and I say that as someone who's lived on the border with Wales.

I think most adults are fine with hearing, "hey that word comes from a bigoted place" and replying, "oh I had no idea, I'll try to use a different word in the future."

That sounds like a very odd conversation between two adults to me. Sounds more like a mother teaching her child. The word welch is fine, the fact that it has historical origins makes the word even more interesting. It's survived until now and we're no more enlightened than previous generations who also used it. In fact thinking we are, as we do, is one of the conceits every period seems to have.

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#168

Post by kodablah »

DannyBee wrote: post #14

Yeah, a quick read of the relevant regs tells me Fanduel is gonna lose this one (Unless i've missed something)[1,2] The law on this is pretty clear, and they can't unilaterally decide not to apply the gaming regulations of the state, or change them through their contracts. (They can decide not to do business in states they don't like the regulations of course) BTW, somewhat hilariously, the part they "..."'d is just…

Seems to me like they'll get in trouble for not consulting the Division and getting prior written approval before rescinding the wager, but not necessarily that the Division will side with the gambler. I am familiar, at least in Oklahoma, where gambling operations have famously been allowed to skirt on mistakes.

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#169

Post by nikanj »

Arzh wrote: post #27
DannyBee wrote: post #14

Yeah, a quick read of the relevant regs tells me Fanduel is gonna lose this one (Unless i've missed something)[1,2] The law on this is pretty clear, and they can't unilaterally decide not to apply the gaming regulations of the state, or change them through their contracts. (They can decide not to do business in states they don't like the regulations of course) BTW, somewhat hilariously, the part they "..."'d is just…

Good reply, I'm wondering they they will try to tie it to how slot machines handle errors ("All errors void play") which just payback the bet but don't payout.

Slot machines go through an absolutely grueling certification process. Interesting to see if FanDuel is willing to subject their software to it.

Re: FanDuel not honoring bet that would have paid over $82,000 due to line error

#170

Post by delecti »

theandrewbailey wrote: post #96
xae342 wrote: post #40

I feel like we need the Second Software Crisis movement to address the bug riddled software were still making, it’s as though we’re just acclimated to bugs everywhere as being expected. Perhaps in 2100 they’ll look back on this time in software as we do on the early automotive industry today.

Did the early automotive industry move fast and break things? Almost certainly.

I think an important difference is how easy it is to deploy absolutely garbage software. It's just not as easy to make a million cars, or fix a million busted cars, as it is to distribute an app across a million devices, so there's less incentive to get it right when you can "move fast and break things".
Post reply on HN