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

U.S. Now Says All Online Gambling Illegal, Not Just Sports Bets

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 164 posts

Re: U.S. Now Says All Online Gambling Illegal, Not Just Sports Bets

#61

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

joejerryronnie wrote: post #21
ianhawes wrote: post #16

> A coalition backed by billionaire casino executive Sheldon Adelson lobbied the Justice Department in 2017 to reconsider its 2011 decision that cleared the way for states to allow online gambling. Adelson was a major financial supporter of Trump and the GOP in 2016 vis-à-vis the Future 45 Super PAC. His wife was recently awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom. This decision was bought and paid for.

All political decisions are bought and paid for, even progressive ones.

While true, I trust a union to be lobbying in favor of workers far more than I trust Walmart.

Re: U.S. Now Says All Online Gambling Illegal, Not Just Sports Bets

#62

Post by pessimizer »

avar wrote: post #50
joobus wrote: post #32

Except for stocks, bonds, options, futures, and forex. Wall St is the only authorized online gambling establishment.

If you're going to define that as gambling then e.g. buying a house with the intent to flip it on the market is also gambling.

Of course it is.

Re: U.S. Now Says All Online Gambling Illegal, Not Just Sports Bets

#63

Post by pessimizer »

jrockway wrote: post #22
techer wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is a raffle not gambling out of interest?

How is insurance not gambling?

Of course it is.

Especially when it's taken out by people who don't even own the asset being insured. For people that do, it's ideally like taking an opposing bet to the bet that you've implicitly taken by owning something that has the possibility of failure.

I guess the line is that if you're on both sides of the bet, it's not gambling.

Selling insurance is definitely gambling, but it's subject to the law of large numbers like everything else - at some point, all of the risk is ironed out by the number of things you insure. At that point, it's a government concession.

Re: U.S. Now Says All Online Gambling Illegal, Not Just Sports Bets

#64

Post by shkkmo »

cdumler wrote: post #49
jrockway wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is insurance not gambling?

The purpose of insurance is such that individuals share the burden to cover random, life-impacting events. From the consumer side, insurance is the purchase of a service to cover any a future debt falling under the category of the service, ie. an unforeseeable, unintentional act of damage by or to the consumer. I have no intention of burning down my house. I pay so that if it were to happen, I am not stuck paying off…

So how is that different from hedging your bets?

Insurance is gambling. The servicer is the house and always wins (unless they screw up).

That is not to say that gambling can't serve purposes other than entertainment, because it can. That doesn't make it not gambling.

Re: U.S. Now Says All Online Gambling Illegal, Not Just Sports Bets

#65

Post by Shivetya »

tanilama wrote: post #19
bovermyer wrote: post #9

Does this affect video game loot boxes, then?

My question as well. Could the gamers make a case and start a class action against the developers if they go too far?

depends on how they are structured. a few companies have moved to where loot boxes guarantee to return goods of the same value as the cost. Now of course they set these values by offering similar goods on their stores for direct purchase. that being said, those values being up the developers could be depicted as misleading.

my take away is this, as long as we allow states to market lotteries then the idea that private companies should be held to differing rules is wrong. either all play on a level playing field or none play. considering the misery many state lotteries are said to bring I don't see how they can stand there smug except the fact they have the courts and police power to get away with it.

Re: U.S. Now Says All Online Gambling Illegal, Not Just Sports Bets

#66

Post by defertoreptar »

gojomo wrote: post #34
spoiledtechie wrote: post #3

what about that predict it website that allows you to bet on politics? Is politics a sport?

University of Wellington (New Zealand) 'PredictIt', like the University of Iowa 'Iowa Electronic Markets', operates with the specific permission of the US federal regulatory agency (CFTC) that would otherwise regulate their tradable contracts. See for example: https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/pr7047-14

> to operate a not-for-profit market for event contracts, and to offer event contracts to U.S. persons, without registration as a designated contract market, foreign board of trade, or swap execution facility, and without registration of its operators.

My understanding is that they don't need to register as an exchange because of this. That doesn't necessarily absolve them of being a form of gambling, does it?

Re: U.S. Now Says All Online Gambling Illegal, Not Just Sports Bets

#68

Post by andruby »

scottlamb wrote: post #51
joobus wrote: post #32

Except for stocks, bonds, options, futures, and forex. Wall St is the only authorized online gambling establishment.

Also online, state-sponsored lotteries. I'd consider lotteries (in general, not just online) more significant in terms of taking wealth away from people who can least afford it, and for no inherent legitimate purpose. (Lotteries fund education, but there are better ways to do that.)

Lotteries are reverse solidarity: a lot of people pay to make 1 person rich.

Lotteries are my prime example when I want to highlight that humans don't act rationally

Re: U.S. Now Says All Online Gambling Illegal, Not Just Sports Bets

#69

Post by LitFan »

andruby wrote: post #68
scottlamb wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also online, state-sponsored lotteries. I'd consider lotteries (in general, not just online) more significant in terms of taking wealth away from people who can least afford it, and for no inherent legitimate purpose. (Lotteries fund education, but there are better ways to do that.)

Lotteries are reverse solidarity: a lot of people pay to make 1 person rich. Lotteries are my prime example when I want to highlight that humans don't act rationally

A possible explanation for why one would participate in a lottery:

What if $5 per week for the rest of their life doesn't impact an individual's standard of living, but $10 million would drastically improve it?

Does it then make (more) sense to participate?

Re: U.S. Now Says All Online Gambling Illegal, Not Just Sports Bets

#70

Post by leetcrew »

MRD85 wrote: post #29
jandrese wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's splitting hairs IMHO. Lots of things we find acceptable are basically gambling like the stock/bond/futures markets, insurance, and prediction markets. Maybe a better answer is why we ban gambling at all. There are people who have a problem with it, but maybe a better solution is to get them help to break the cycle instead of banning it in some cases but not others.

I live in Australia, which has very relaxed gambling laws. I can walk into most pubs/bars in my city and find poker machines for example, as well as a sports/horse betting facility. There are huge social consequences to gambling. If you look at an entire society you have some people that will have problems with it and some people that won't. You may fall into the "won't" pile but surely society benefits if we prevent…

> surely society benefits if we prevent a large number of our members from falling prey to addiction.

how does society benefit from prohibiting people from doing things that only hurt themselves?

Post reply on HN