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

The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

orchidfiles.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 238 posts

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#41

Post by jjulius »

embedding-shape wrote: post #23
3form wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't like mixing of everything 18+ in the article. I think the author wants to put all the stigma in one basket, and I don't it's as simple. For example, porn meets some actual human needs and has a certain function - but gambling? Simple abuse at scale. I think like you argue, society shaping business is good. And some people should really reevaluate what they're going for if that's too much for them.

> For example, porn meets some actual human needs and has a certain function - but gambling? Simple abuse at scale. Now I'm as as free-minded as people typically gets, but both of those are just "entertainment" for me, one is not more "essential" than the other, what exact "human need" does pornography meet that somehow gambling doesn't also meet, since we're not talking about "fun" or "entertainment" here but someth…

[dead]

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#42

Post by engineer_22 »

master-lincoln wrote: post #35
engineer_22 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in New York. A very old very famous manufacturer of firearms, Remington Arms, which employed hundreds of people and was the economic engine of its community was forced by the State of New York to shut down. That community cannot replace what was lost when the factory closed. Poverty, crime, drugs have moved in to the void. You may be right that guns are are corrosive to a democratic society, that's an open deb…

straw man argument. This was about social stigma of weapons and you told a story about a factory being force closed and the surrounding community degrading by that. We should not keep bad things alive just because jobs depend on it.

Its not a straw man, its not even an argument, it's just what happened.

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#43

Post by jmkd »

malfist wrote: post #16
jmkd wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of other products that literally ruin people's lives: alcohol, tobacco, sugar, pharmaceuticals, credit cards, firearms, timeshares, junk food. Society has them all on very different parts of a stigma spectrum. Honest question: why is this line so clear for you?

Honest question, why isn't the line so clear for you? We're talking about a product built to make people's lives worse while extracting wealth from them that get them addicted as well.

Okay sounds like we agree that sugar and junk food should be on the wrong side of the line, but turns out those industries have very little stigma. Who is standing outside the school gates protesting against big cola? My point is it's complicated, ambiguous, sometimes hypocritical, differs by jurisdiction and so on. None of it is clear.

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#44

Post by jmkd »

sakisv wrote: post #36
jmkd wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of other products that literally ruin people's lives: alcohol, tobacco, sugar, pharmaceuticals, credit cards, firearms, timeshares, junk food. Society has them all on very different parts of a stigma spectrum. Honest question: why is this line so clear for you?

Not the original person you replied to, but as far as I'm concerned there are a few questions that could very easily indicate which side of the line is something. E.g. - Is it addictive? - Does it have the potential to destroy lives? - Does it have the potential to destroy lives in seconds? - Does it have a strong lobbying mechanism behind it? (n.b. things that are good and nice rarely need someone to bribe people to…

Your question ramp makes sense to me except in two ways: 1. why this "destroy lives in seconds?" question? 2. where do you see sugar sitting here?

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#45

Post by 8-prime »

embedding-shape wrote: post #23
3form wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't like mixing of everything 18+ in the article. I think the author wants to put all the stigma in one basket, and I don't it's as simple. For example, porn meets some actual human needs and has a certain function - but gambling? Simple abuse at scale. I think like you argue, society shaping business is good. And some people should really reevaluate what they're going for if that's too much for them.

> For example, porn meets some actual human needs and has a certain function - but gambling? Simple abuse at scale. Now I'm as as free-minded as people typically gets, but both of those are just "entertainment" for me, one is not more "essential" than the other, what exact "human need" does pornography meet that somehow gambling doesn't also meet, since we're not talking about "fun" or "entertainment" here but someth…

While the porn industry has issue, at its core it isn't constructed to extract money from you.

Boiling Gambling down to just being "entertainment" is a bit too reductionist in my opinion.

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#46

Post by sigmoid10 »

joosters wrote: post #34
b40d-48b2-979e wrote: post #5

You may have a cool product in the field of sports betting, casinos, or lotteries. But almost all social networks and search engines won’t let you advertise without a license from the required jurisdiction. Good . You should face social stigma for creating products that literally ruin people's lives.

I think the more relevant point is: But almost all social networks and search engines won’t let you advertise without a license from the required jurisdiction. Which is a good thing! This is an area full of scammers, if you can't set up your business legally, I'm very happy to hear it's more difficult for you to advertise it.

I mean, you also can't advertise illegal drugs either. Doesn't seem to curb demand though. It may actually be more beneficial to allow these things more broadly, because then social safety features can be wedged in between consumers and suppliers more easily and they don't have to deal with a gigantic shadow market that already gets stigmatised to death by the rest of the population. Just accept that a certain percentage of the populations has screwed up dopamine households and try to keep them away from gangsters as best you can. That would probably help society as a whole more than banning everything and pretending the problem goes away if you close your eyes.

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#47

Post by bilekas »

b40d-48b2-979e wrote: post #5

You may have a cool product in the field of sports betting, casinos, or lotteries. But almost all social networks and search engines won’t let you advertise without a license from the required jurisdiction. Good . You should face social stigma for creating products that literally ruin people's lives.

I was having this discussion the other day with a friend, I do believe as an adult you should be allowed to do anything you want providing you're not harming others.

That said, there is a HUGE need for more regulation around advertising, cut off limits and companies recognising users with a problem.

If you take a Bar for example, most barmen will notice you're already drunk as hell and cut you off, probably kick you out if not get you some water etc. It's actually a legal requirement to stop at some point in countries.

Casinos on the other hand, if you are down 99,000 out of your 100,000 with zero hands of games won, that casino is going to plow you with a good time until it has that last 1,000. It's disgusting.

I hate gambling , I've seen its effect on friends of mine and their families. But I would never stop an adult doing what they want, while knowing the risks.

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#48

Post by watwut »

bilekas wrote: post #47
b40d-48b2-979e wrote: post #5

You may have a cool product in the field of sports betting, casinos, or lotteries. But almost all social networks and search engines won’t let you advertise without a license from the required jurisdiction. Good . You should face social stigma for creating products that literally ruin people's lives.

I was having this discussion the other day with a friend, I do believe as an adult you should be allowed to do anything you want providing you're not harming others. That said, there is a HUGE need for more regulation around advertising, cut off limits and companies recognising users with a problem. If you take a Bar for example, most barmen will notice you're already drunk as hell and cut you off, probably kick you…

Unlicensed casinos and betting apps harm others.

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#49

Post by ambicapter »

jmkd wrote: post #44
sakisv wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the original person you replied to, but as far as I'm concerned there are a few questions that could very easily indicate which side of the line is something. E.g. - Is it addictive? - Does it have the potential to destroy lives? - Does it have the potential to destroy lives in seconds? - Does it have a strong lobbying mechanism behind it? (n.b. things that are good and nice rarely need someone to bribe people to…

Your question ramp makes sense to me except in two ways: 1. why this "destroy lives in seconds?" question? 2. where do you see sugar sitting here?

He's obviously talking about alcohol (it takes seconds to consume an amount of alcohol that can result in death, yours or someone else's from a fight or car crash) and firearms (should be obvious).

Sounds like you're implying some sort of mischaracterization of sugar here which minimizes the former in a weird way.

Re: The operating cost of adult and gambling startups

#50

Post by melenaboija »

A_Duck wrote: post #3

What's the author trying to say here? It's good that the law isn't the only line between good and evil. A bit of stigma is a bottom-up way for people to shape society. If nobody invites you to dinner parties because you run a startup that combines payday-lending and day-trading, that's a good thing. It's free alpha for companies doing more worthwhile things.

That is successful and makes tons of money.

The author is saying it explicitly, you can’t flex as normal people do so you have to feed your ego finding different ways such as anonymous posts. Or talking to an stranger being drunk.

Post reply on HN