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

We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

derekthompson.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 741 posts

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#261

Post by brailsafe »

socalgal2 wrote: post #205
mcmcmc wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the difference between the two is Amazon and Meta do provide some utility to balance it out, whereas gambling is purely a net negative on society. You can be young and naive enough to believe you're "making the world a better place" in big tech. You can't work on pure gambling products without being a scammer at heart; you know what you signed up for.

You can, because the definition of gambling is loose. Magic The Gathering is gambling. You by a pack and hope you get a valuable card, no different than buying a lottery ticket and hope you win. Pokemon Go is also gambling. You pay to hatch eggs and hope you get a rare pokemon. I'm pretty confident the people who made these games don't consider their design to be evil or wrong. In fact, I'm sure they see themselves h…

I'd be slightly more specific with those assertions, and point them at the gambling mechanics themselves, although I do agree. The games are not inseparable from those mechanics, and are quite fun on their own.

I just got into magic, and am sadly watching my more gambling prone friends fall down that rabit hole. They keep asking me what cards I've bought or whatever and the answer is none, aside from a starter deck. I have literally zero interest in engaging with any game in that way, despite enjoying the booster pack gamble as kid with pokemon.

If I were to gamble, I'd much rather throw a couple bucks on who wins a game rather than what cards I'll get.

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#262

Post by littlecranky67 »

alfalfasprout wrote: post #246
littlecranky67 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it is your company then this is fine, it is your money afterall, and can do as you see fit. If you are employed or have co-shareholders, you are managing someone elses money. And you are not supposed to act within your morals, but those of the company. It would be kind of hipocritical to act on your own morals using someone elses money - up to the point where it could be illegal misapropriation. And then taking th…

Acting within your morals is not incompatible with serving the company's interests. Especially if it means your team is very much still competent while maintaining a culture that is healthy. That leads to better delivery. Avoiding working in deeply unethical areas also shields the company from legal or PR liability.

It is compatible if you align your actions with the morals of the company. A big sign that you are not aligned with the values of the company, if you do not want anybody within that company (especially your boss) to know on what moral grounds you make your decision and justify your actions.

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#263

Post by munk-a »

socalgal2 wrote: post #194
jackfruitpeel wrote: post #88

The craziest thing here is that online gambling has been legal in the UK and Ireland for many years, and it's been such an obvious negative for those countries — and had been optimized brutally like any other tech product. When I moved over to the US a decade ago, I remember thinking 'well at least they're smart enough to have banned online gambling'. I am very pro personal liberties, but this stuff is weaponized to…

> I am very pro personal liberties, but this stuff is weaponized to prey on a subset of humanity This triggers thoughts. I don't like people being taken advantage of. At the same time, I like my personal liberties. It feels like you can spin this idea for nearly anything. Apparently 25% of alcohol sales are to alcoholics. That sucks and you could spin this has the liquor companies taking advantage, but I have tons of…

> It feels like you can spin this idea for nearly anything. Apparently 25% of alcohol sales are to alcoholics.

I'd like to propose not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. I accept this argument about gambling might be slippery-slope-able but I think it's pretty obvious to everyone without a vested interest that it's causing extreme societal harm.

Would you be opening to banning just this one thing and then calling it a day and opening the floor back up to such arguments? I think modern politics is too caught up in the bureaucracies of maybe to let good ideas be carried out - honestly, this thought line could easily be written up into an argument that parallels strong-towns. Local bureaucracy is rarely created for a downright malicious reason - here we have a change that could cause an outsized positive outcome so why should we get caught up in philosophical debates about how similar decisions might be less positive and let that cast doubt on our original problem?

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#264

Post by skippyboxedhero »

hydroflame7 wrote: post #4

'Predictions' market is the silliest loophole for gambling. Honestly, more surprised Fanduel, DraftKings and the like who have spent millions on lobbying and buying licenses, are not fighting tooth and nail on this.

Both have a prediction market product.

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#265

Post by Lalabadie »

taurath wrote: post #94

The entire country seems built on taking advantage of people, from my vantage point right now. Whether it’s attention, drugs, or business/legal leverage, everyone is out for advantage and they’re not even pretending to care about people they affect.

I read "scambling" recently and the word has stayed with me since.

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#266

Post by JumpCrisscross »

littlecranky67 wrote: post #211
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It would be kind of hipocritical to act on your own morals using someone elses money - up to the point where it could be illegal misapropriation This is hyperbole. Refusing to hire anyone out of any of the big tech companies is an own goal. But being silly in management is absolutely legal. The only legal obligation I can think of revolves around disclosure, i.e. you should be open with investors and the company ab…

It is not black/white. If you have a qualified candidate that asks less money and reject them over a less-qualified candidate on the sole grounds they worked for a prediction marked, it could be called silly. If the discprancy in qualification and salary demends is high enough and you do this repeatedly, it can be gross misconduct and not only a reason to be fired, but to be held financially liable for the damage.

> If the discprancy in qualification and salary demends is high enough and you do this repeatedly, it can be gross misconduct and not only a reason to be fired, but to be held financially liable for the damage

Again, major caveat, if you do it without disclosing your reasons, possibly. And unless you're personally profiting from it in some way, highly doubtful on financial liability. (Disclaier: not a lawyer.)

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#267

Post by boelboel »

lenerdenator wrote: post #243
taurath wrote: post #94

The entire country seems built on taking advantage of people, from my vantage point right now. Whether it’s attention, drugs, or business/legal leverage, everyone is out for advantage and they’re not even pretending to care about people they affect.

Well, really, that's all countries. Some dude was willing to resort to more depraved measures than his rivals, and made enough people do what he wanted in order to become the leader.

Very ahistorical view

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#268

Post by amrocha »

Chris2048 wrote: post #109
jackfruitpeel wrote: post #88

The craziest thing here is that online gambling has been legal in the UK and Ireland for many years, and it's been such an obvious negative for those countries — and had been optimized brutally like any other tech product. When I moved over to the US a decade ago, I remember thinking 'well at least they're smart enough to have banned online gambling'. I am very pro personal liberties, but this stuff is weaponized to…

> made it clear that anyone who has worked on these products should not be hired As in, even a dev, HR, etc person having worked for an online gambling company? I feel this may be a slippery slope..

Actions have consequences. You can justify your actions however you want, and I can judge you for them.

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#269

Post by JumpCrisscross »

pcthrowaway wrote: post #242
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> unless you're also not hiring anyone from companies like Amazon, Meta, and all the other tech companies that have also ruined/preyed on society in their own way just as much as any gambling app has It depends on the role. If you were doing something deeply technical, or facing customers who loved your work, I think you get a pass. If you were building features nobody outside your company is thankful for, you need t…

Building part of a killing machine isn't really something you can defend, even if you weren't working on the part of the machine that does the killing.

> Building part of a killing machine isn't really something you can defend

Of course it is. I don't personally have an issue with folks who worked on weapons of war. Particularly if they're honest with themselves about the work they did. Doubly particularly if they felt a sense of mission in it.

And in an integrated culture and economy, the difference between a person who happens to work at a company with an evil project in a random division and a person who grows complacent about politics with their non-problematic job is thin to the point of vanishing.

Post reply on HN