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

Addiction Markets

thebignewsletter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 479 posts

Re: Addiction Markets

#121

Post by hyperadvanced »

paxys wrote: post #21
rybosworld wrote: post #10

I don't think you can kill corporate run gambling - people will just use some offshore website instead. It might be something we should treat more like smoking. - Require a disclosure of the EV of each bet as the user is placing it. E.g.: Expected loss $5. - Ad targeting restrictions.

> people will just use some offshore website instead No they won't, because moving real money to and from these shady offshore websites is a nightmare, and without enforcement there will be too much fraud in the system for the vast majority of regular people to bother. Gambling is so prevalent today because 1) there is incessant advertising, including being overlaid on the game you are watching and 2) it is convenien…

I think you’re right - some people will gamble no matter what, but removing all barriers to entry and advertising it on ESPN will certainly grow that market much more than people actively seeking out betting in shady places online.

It’s similar to weed legalization 10 years ago. Yes, it’s now much less likely that your weed will be spiked with meth or you will be robbed by your dealer, but also like 1000% more of the population smokes weed now and it has some bad social side effects that people don’t like to think about.

I think in both cases, as with prohibition, making something commonplace illegal again tends to make people do crazy things if they’re addicted, and I’d bet gambling is no different

Re: Addiction Markets

#122

Post by hshdhdhehd »

nekusar wrote: post #30

People are also leaving out stuff like Pokemon, Yu Gi Oh, and Magic The Gathering. All of them also introduce rarities (arbitrary exclusiveness), hidden cards in a pack, and extreme gambling gamification. The only non-gambling MtG packs are the preconstructed commander decks. All 100 cards are published. But the packs and boxes? Pure gambling, especially for the chase rare cards. And before anyone asks, yes, my usern…

And Robinhood etc.?

Re: Addiction Markets

#123

Post by asdff »

lurk2 wrote: post #108
asdff wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like it only became rampant in recent years. As a 90s kid no one cared about the card packs. We all assumed they'd be junk cards and a waste of $7 or whatever. No, the move for card people back then was to wait for the card show and just buy the cards you actually want from a card dealer. The thing is now people are marketing the pack opening. You have social media accounts of them pulling cards from packs and…

> Again no one thought that was fun in the 90s, everyone hated that aspect of cards in the 90s How old was everyone in the 1990s? Kids loved this kind of thing in the 2000s.

I can't imagine kids even liked it then. Again most of those packs were junk cards. Like total crap cards. Oh gee a rattata and some energy cards. All you wanted was Ash's squad from the shows.

Re: Addiction Markets

#124

Post by Karrot_Kream »

loeg wrote: post #115
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the logic behind the war on drugs and we all saw how that turned out. Obviously there's nuance to be had as I think some vices, in both type and magnitude, are worse/more destructive than others. But crusades against vice rarely turn out well. Instead you'll see the same people huddled around in underground betting rooms and backroom card game tables where organized crime or just other muscle-for-hire are rea…

Dude, the war on gambling was going fine before it was legalized nationwide like 2 years ago. We don't have to have long memories to remember a time before omnipresent sports betting! It was fine!

Sports betting is only one form of gambling, so I have no idea what you're talking about. This article, like your post it seems, is conflating the two and mixing in vague assertions of corporations and whatnot to add a layer of emotion that serves more to manipulate than to elucidate.

There's always been gambling in my lifetime. There's been legal ones like Indian Casinos and Vegas. Then there's been the below board ones, the private blackjack games, the mahjong parlors in shady parts of town, lottery players (it's okay if the government profits off the losers I guess lol), etc

If this article were talking about banning sports books and adding in regulation around retail betting then sure that would be a fun discussion. But hyperbole like the article and your copious use of exclamation points doesn't inspire confidence.

Re: Addiction Markets

#125

Post by hshdhdhehd »

turtletontine wrote: post #42
gcanyon wrote: post #16

This line from the ads always strikes me as darkly ironic: > if you need help making responsible choices, call… Like, the only “responsible” choice is not to gamble online. What do they even think we’re supposed to take away from that line of the commercial?

We’re not supposed to take anything from it, it’s a simple legal liability thing. (And maybe actually mandated by law?) It’s like mandatory workplace trainings: they do almost nothing to prevent people from acting badly, but they let employers say “look we told our employers not to do this!!! it’s not our fault they did it anyway!!” (More apt comparison is obviously alcohol commercials saying “please drink responsibl…

Funny you say that as any level of alcohol consumption is bad for your body.

Re: Addiction Markets

#126

Post by asdff »

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #106
asdff wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Standard bible thumping. You will notice that there is also an emphasis on traditional family values as well both in the media and in the positions of politicians.

I guess it's been interesting watching this become popular in secular, lefty circles rather than the historically religious right circles I see this from.

The mainstream left (really a centrist party) might be nominally secular but not really removed from conservative religious values. E.g. consider treatment of gay people in the media vs actual gay culture. In the media it is always a happy monogamous couple where one of the gays is clearly masculine and the other is clearly more effeminate. In reality gay culture is far more complicated than that, with many engaging in polyamorous relationships and/or routine clubbing for example that you won't ever see celebrated in this way in the mainstream media, which sees that sort of behavior as immoral just as a religious person might.

I'd hate to get all true scotsman but a true leftist would never preach for prohibition as a solution for vice.

Re: Addiction Markets

#127

Post by hshdhdhehd »

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #71

On a somewhat related note, there seems to be a huge interest in vice policing on social media. Gambling, sex, drugs, these are some of humanity's oldest vices. Why has it become so popular on social media to highlight these, along with a narrative of social or cultural decline?

Think of it in terms of public health not morality. Heart disease is one of humanities oldest killers but we still want to fix it. We also dont want to ban deep friers as we value freedom. Similar for gambling. We do want to discuss what to do when vice becomes no longer nice.

Re: Addiction Markets

#128

Post by array_key_first »

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #114
array_key_first wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Polymarket is like the stock market, that is to say, it's gambling. Nobody should be day trading unless it's their job. Yes, I have seen many guys get sucked into it.

And people shouldn't be constantly buying mechanical keyboards and keycaps for farming social media karma and affirming their identity when they probably only have a few devices that need keyboards anyway. There's a whole rabbit hole of vice out there if you're interested in looking. While we're at it, I propose a Board of Ethically Allowed Activities that make sure we can only do the good and moral things.

I'm not saying that we should restrict it. I'm just saying it's not productive or healthy.

The difference is that hobbies are fun. Gambling is fun in the same way smoking is fun. It's not, but you have to do it. I know, because I was a smoker.

Also, on the topic of morality: morality is stupid. Gambling isn't immoral. Or maybe it is, I don't care. Gambling is self destructive. It can pretty much exclusively only make your life worse.

Re: Addiction Markets

#129

Post by wizzwizz4 »

rsync wrote: post #62
savanaly wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the only “responsible” choice is not to gamble online I don't gamble at all in any form, but I still firmly disagree. Some people enjoy gambling in a way that never hurts them-- I've known countless friends and coworkers who talk about doing a bit of it in Vegas or what have you. You're saying every last one is a degenerate gambler somehow concealing it totally from me? They know they're not going net positive on t…

Bob and Alice and the eavesdropper is Eve … What name do we give “the guy who says it’s fine to tear down Chestertons fence” ?

Robert the reformist.

Re: Addiction Markets

#130

Post by Karrot_Kream »

asdff wrote: post #126
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess it's been interesting watching this become popular in secular, lefty circles rather than the historically religious right circles I see this from.

The mainstream left (really a centrist party) might be nominally secular but not really removed from conservative religious values. E.g. consider treatment of gay people in the media vs actual gay culture. In the media it is always a happy monogamous couple where one of the gays is clearly masculine and the other is clearly more effeminate. In reality gay culture is far more complicated than that, with many engaging…

I think the centrist vs leftist distinction isn't particularly interesting for me in this instance because that's a discussion that feels more relevant at a political party level for me. In the US, the Democrats as a party are center-left.

But the audience for these anti-vice takes seems to be "lefty" people. Both center-left folks and also leftists. I see plenty of folks on Bluesky who want a socialist revolution tomorrow that also want to ban gambling.

Post reply on HN