Untitled topic • Hacker News Board

Re: undefined

#191

Post by pimlottc » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 5:24 AM UTC

pavel_lishin wrote: post #46

imroot wrote: post #43

There's a really good book about the design of the slot machines, called Addiction by Design. It talks about the different UI and design elements that go into keeping the gambler engaged and why they keep spending more money. It's a really amazing and enlightening book to read if you're interested in learning more about the mechanics of the slot machines and the designs of the casino. https://www.amazon.com/Addiction…

I absolutely don't understand the draw of slot machines. I watched a woman playing a smartphone version on the subway; for three stops, she just kept hitting the "spin" button and watching the results. I admit to not knowing how they work, but do they typically have any more interaction than "pull lever, sporadically receive reward"?

I recently had occasion to play a slot machine briefly to cash out some free credits and I was highly amused to find an option to have a split screen so you can watch TV while you play...

Re: undefined

#192

Post by Friction87 » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 5:28 AM UTC

schoen wrote: post #189

Friction87 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LOL it's nice that you think I have relationships. I hope that answers your question. E: to amend that, I do have a small group of close male friends but I do have trouble finding an intimate relationship, due to other (unrelated? maybe?) issues with women.

I didn't only mean romantic relationships, but family relationships and friendships. I'm sure there are plenty of non-addiction-related reasons for being single!

It's interesting about the familial relationships. My father is pretty far along the religious spectrum and I am not, however we get along just fine. Of course the alcohol is something of a taboo and there have been certain frictions in between my life choices and his (such as the drinking and piercings/tattoos) however overall the relationship is still what I'd consider stable.

I realize I might have taken this a bit too personally and lost track of the overall theme. I do agree that judging the effect of certain vices could also be judged by more than just "does it affect your livelihood".

Re: undefined

#193

Post by micaksica » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 5:28 AM UTC

Tistel wrote: post #149

My first job out of Uni was making "games" for slot machines. My soul is forever damaged (not joking). I have horror stories over how much thought goes into the "design." In a given jurisdiction (State/Province/County) there will be rules about the payout percentage. Anywhere from 90 to 98%. So lets assume 95% percent payout. In the long run, you give me a dollar, I give you back $0.95. Most of the time its zero, som…

> The gambling industry is exploring the dimensions of the mind trying to find the optimal Skinner box to take all your money. They are exploiting a bug in our brains design. We evolved to run around the Savannah and throw things with weird accuracy. We just are not built to defend against it. They should be banned.

So we should ban viral mechanics, those old Facebook games, dark UI/UX patterns, and pay-to-play mobile games as well? They often work in the same manner, and yet you yourself appear to know the risks and appear to be immune to them.

For the record: I like gambling. I like drinking, too. I have neither a gambling addiction nor an alcohol addiction. Should I be disallowed these things I find pleasurable because a subset of the population abuses these things?

Re: undefined

#194

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 5:52 AM UTC

oska wrote: post #172

Tistel wrote: post #149

My first job out of Uni was making "games" for slot machines. My soul is forever damaged (not joking). I have horror stories over how much thought goes into the "design." In a given jurisdiction (State/Province/County) there will be rules about the payout percentage. Anywhere from 90 to 98%. So lets assume 95% percent payout. In the long run, you give me a dollar, I give you back $0.95. Most of the time its zero, som…

> They should be banned. I would instead suggest mandating a payout percentage of 100%, i.e. the machines make no profit for the owner. Venues might still buy them as ‘entertainment’ but not as profit centres. Instead they would be a customer attraction cost (purchase price plus electricity) for venues like bars and clubs, just like hiring live entertainment. Gamblers will still gamble on them, thinking they'll be th…

[deleted]

Re: undefined

#195

Post by trcollinson » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 5:56 AM UTC

micaksica wrote: post #193

Tistel wrote: post #149

My first job out of Uni was making "games" for slot machines. My soul is forever damaged (not joking). I have horror stories over how much thought goes into the "design." In a given jurisdiction (State/Province/County) there will be rules about the payout percentage. Anywhere from 90 to 98%. So lets assume 95% percent payout. In the long run, you give me a dollar, I give you back $0.95. Most of the time its zero, som…

> The gambling industry is exploring the dimensions of the mind trying to find the optimal Skinner box to take all your money. They are exploiting a bug in our brains design. We evolved to run around the Savannah and throw things with weird accuracy. We just are not built to defend against it. They should be banned. So we should ban viral mechanics, those old Facebook games, dark UI/UX patterns, and pay-to-play mobil…

Most of these questions are deeply philosophical and I have no answer for you. But I will ask you this: if giving up on gambling which you are not addicted to but find pleasurable saves a subset of the population that cannot control their own abuse of gambling, would you do it? In fact, to be a bit more specific, if you giving up gambling saved the next Scott Stevens and that persons family from the financial ruin and death that they bring on themselves, would you do it?

Of course, there are counter arguments to this. How can we know that giving up on gambling or even removing the whole gambling industry will help or save anyone? I have no answer. Only opinion. It's a rough one.

Re: undefined

#196

Post by witty_username » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 6:09 AM UTC

stcredzero wrote: post #81

Players become so absorbed in the machines that they leave young children unattended, wet themselves without noticing, and neglect to eat for hours. Sounds like video games. (Disclosure: I'm developing a multiplayer game, precisely because I feel the underlying similarities to resort casinos in multiplayer games insult my intelligence.)

Almost all videogame players are not like that.

Re: undefined

#197

Post by csense » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 6:22 AM UTC

I have zero sympathy for gambling addicts. They voluntarily choose to enter into unfavorable financial transactions (i.e. make -EV bets). As long as the casino's encouragements don't step over the line from aggressive marketing into fraud or coercion.

Yes, they exploit human psychology to convince people to spend money, potentially large amounts of money, unwisely on something they don't actually need. That's the purpose of the entire field of marketing, from advertising jingles on the radio in the 1930's to the sexy elf girl on the Everquest box in the 1990's to the reward point cards popping up at every store in the 2010's.

Yes, it's shitty, slimy, exploitative and more than a little creepy. I personally hate marketing, and in fact I've met very few people that enjoy being targeted by it. But the fact of the matter is, as long as you have large societies of people talking to each other, businesses will be built on speaking to customers and convincing them to part with their money for some product of very questionable value. If you legalize, you can regulate and tax, so that the games are relatively clean and fair, and enforcement of disputes is handled relatively non-violently through the legal system. Otherwise, you'll just drive it underground.

Re: undefined

#198

Post by grogenaut » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 6:50 AM UTC

downandout wrote: post #170

thefalcon wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gaming regulators prohibit many on-the-fly changes to machines while on the floor. Online casinos certainly could and probably are doing some variation of this though, and all those manufacturers sell "at home" software versions of their machines and would be smart to be doing split testing of player behavior in that software.

I'm aware, but most gambling regulations are heavily influenced by lobbyists. If the industry realized how much more money they could make from this, they would get it approved.

Gambling regulation's #1 worry is fraud/theft. Everything has to be predictable. Builds have to be repeatable. Think about that, gcc has to emit the same binary / assets down to the timestamps from the same inputs. Java too. All source is read, all rng's are run massive numbers of times to experimentally prove them. Program storage needs to be non-volitale and they will run an arc welder across the frame of the box to try and skew the computer.

All of this is to say that they are ultra paranoid of changes that could lead to fraud. Remote updates without their review woudn't pass. With their approval and auditing maybe.

Source: My boss worked in this industry and talks about it basically every lunch.

Re: undefined

#199

Post by kartan » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 7:03 AM UTC

downandout wrote: post #154

Tistel wrote: post #149

My first job out of Uni was making "games" for slot machines. My soul is forever damaged (not joking). I have horror stories over how much thought goes into the "design." In a given jurisdiction (State/Province/County) there will be rules about the payout percentage. Anywhere from 90 to 98%. So lets assume 95% percent payout. In the long run, you give me a dollar, I give you back $0.95. Most of the time its zero, som…

Most of the slots these days are just cabinets with touchscreen LCDs, a bill changer, a player's card reader, and a computer running software. Of course it's evil, but I'm surprised they aren't split testing the reward frequencies, and then having the software adjust automatically to the one that generates the most total action for the game. That way they wouldn't have to ripoff other manufacturers' games when they s…

> I'm surprised they aren't split testing the reward frequencies

Of course this is done. It is just slower than in the web as other people has pointed out you can't change things on the fly.

I worked for the gambling industry and we had a statistics department that take care of this kind of things. You try different machines and you have different local maximums:

- There is the machine for the slow player that is there all day. It gives back a lot of small rewards so people keep playing and playing. It doesn't makes so much money but makes sure that your section of machines (each section is from a different company) is never empty.

- There are hard machines for places like Las Vegas. People bets hard and expects big colorful prices.

- There are machines for the small town casinos. This machines are softer than the ones in Las Vegas. But also optimized for its target audience.

Then there is the amount of noise, your section of machines should look like is giving prices all the time. The design of the cabinet (in Mexico they have a place to put plates as people eats there).

Yes. It is serious business. And there are a million considerations that each company takes into account. A/B testing was there a lot before the web was a thing.

Re: undefined

#200

Post by themodelplumber » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 7:05 AM UTC

csense wrote: post #197

I have zero sympathy for gambling addicts. They voluntarily choose to enter into unfavorable financial transactions (i.e. make -EV bets). As long as the casino's encouragements don't step over the line from aggressive marketing into fraud or coercion. Yes, they exploit human psychology to convince people to spend money, potentially large amounts of money, unwisely on something they don't actually need. That's the pur…

> They voluntarily choose to enter into unfavorable financial transactions (i.e. make -EV bets).

No. They are uneducated and they need help. They are not making rational decisions as described, they are navigating by their feelings.

I helped provide social welfare for people like this in a side gig. One woman was just the _nicest_ you could ever meet; she helped everyone. But when she stepped into a casino, something in her subconscious told her that the universe was finally going to reward her goodness.

I still try to stay in touch with her daughter, who graduated from high school as a homeless kid.

The family was terribly affected. But I still sympathize with the mom. She didn't voluntarily choose this problem. It doesn't even take sophisticated software to manipulate her. People continue to help her move forward, though, and she can change and is mostly OK these days.

> That's the purpose of the entire field of marketing

I disagree; that's simply black and white thinking. If you hear "let's sell people something" and think, "oh, they want to exploit somebody," that's not how it actually works; it's just your perception. Do _some_ people and organizations work in an exploitative way? Sure. Do they all? No. I just don't believe that putting out the guy with the sandwich board equates with manipulation, or that any manipulation is all of the same degree.

The HN audience converges with the audience that absolutely despises marketing; this is due to their preferred cognitive toolset which is very analytical and uncomfortable with the power of emotion. Others have different toolsets. They see marketing as a way to get people on both ends of a deal good outcomes in a mostly-good world.

> I personally hate marketing

I wouldn't trust that; marketing is just a reflection of human cognitive functions which are probably not a preferred part of your personal approach to life. A huge segment of society sees it as a way to move forward productively, even though it does carry risk like anything else.