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

251–260 of 479 posts

Re: Addiction Markets

#251

Post by dns_snek »

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #130
asdff wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 to…

> In the US, the Democrats as a party are center-left.

The case of US Democrats is an example of how useless the 1-dimensional classification is. They can be very socially progressive which would seem to put them well into the "left-wing" territory, but economically they're in the right-wing territory.

Economically speaking, a candidate like Sanders (considered to be too radical even by the Democrats and painted as an extremist by the Republicans) would be considered centrist/centre-left in most of Europe. He supports single payer healthcare and policies that would strengthen worker protections and improve the social safety net, but he doesn't fundamentally oppose capitalism. That's the status quo in most of Europe.

Re: Addiction Markets

#253

Post by iamacyborg »

superfrank wrote: post #198
musicale wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you lose (most people, most of the time), you don't have to pay tax on winnings because there aren't any. But gambling itself seems like sort of a regressive tax that preys upon those susceptible to gambling. Edit: at least with state lotteries the state gets most of the money so it is more like a tax; in the case of corporate sports betting the corporation takes the money and then pays a small corporate tax on…

Federally, That's not even true anymore. In the BBB there was a tax code change that says you can only write off 90% of your losses from sports betting now. If you win $95 on one bet and lose $100 on another, you owe taxes on $5 of that $95.

> In the BBB there was a tax code change that says you can only write off 90% of your losses from sports betting now.

If I understand correctly that’s no longer the case as “sports betting” prediction markets are now becoming a financial product.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/newsletters/2025-07-10/do-...

Re: Addiction Markets

#254

Post by fragmede »

edot wrote: post #164
only-one1701 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incredibly damning, yes

Damning which way, though? Are gambling taxes too high, or are corporate taxes too low? And since corporate income is surely higher than gambling income, I’m inclined to think that gambling taxes are too high AND corporate taxes are too low, creating this odd fact. Edit: and I know it sounds weird to say that gambling taxes are too high, when one could argue that high taxes are meant to disincentivize a thing - but i…

Damning in that pretend I told you my household income was supported by Vinny the bank robber who gives me cash and I launder it for him, and that pays for 6% of my household income. If I told you you can't make bank robbery illegal because I need that money, would you take me seriously at all?

Re: Addiction Markets

#255

Post by mock-possum »

agigao wrote: post #234

Personal choice is when it just exists, like Las Vegas in Nevada. If you really really want to gamble then go, travel to Nevada and do it. The problem is sticking their filthy ads and purchased propagandists into the faces of vulnerable people and society at large. Preying on victims over the phone, soc. media ads, bought manipulators so called influencers with no morale.

I sure did have to scroll down to find the best comment - appreciate that you were willing to make it.

Re: Addiction Markets

#257

Post by TheCapeGreek »

squigz wrote: post #36
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…

I think there's a massive difference between card packs - which have been as you describe for decades - and the recent boom in sports betting. Most people don't even know what MTG is, or that there's even a market for those cards. Everyone now knows that you can bet on any sport you want - and if some reports are to be believed, a large percentage of people are participating. Anyway, this is why I play MTG online - s…

> Anyway, this is why I play MTG online

I think this depends on how you interact with your chosen game. To me, I play Yugioh as a hobby. If I'm "only" into the digital versions of the game, then it's no different to playing just about any other video game.

And even then, these live service TCGs (outside of unofficial simulators) can often have the same lootbox/pack gambling aspects as the real thing.

Personally that's not what I want. A good chunk of why I play paper is because of the physical community, in a space outside my home.

Re: Addiction Markets

#258

Post by haritha-j »

I used to live in Sri Lanka and one of the most pervasive things I noticed when I moved to the west were all these gambling ads. There, it was widely accepted that gambling was harmful. Yes, you could do it, but you could never advertise it. I'm shocked that my 3rd world country has way better control over this than the west.

Re: Addiction Markets

#259

Post by kgwgk »

photon_garden wrote: post #233
shipman05 wrote: post #142

It feels like banning advertising for gambling would be a sweet spot between harm reduction and maintaining individual liberty. Sports gambling ads have ruined sports media. State lottery ads are even worse. The government should not spend money to encourage its own citizens to partake in harmful activities.

Norway does a great job of this with the government-owned alcohol monopoly. The stores are always just a little bit out of the way, with slightly inconvenient hours. You can still get a beer if you want, but it takes a little bit of doing.

> You can still get a beer if you want, but it takes a little bit of doing.

It takes a little bit of money but you can get a beer at the supermarket.

Re: Addiction Markets

#260

Post by PaulRobinson »

I am a semi-professional gambler, based in the UK. To parse that statement: I have a day job; I make about as much income from software that trades on betting exchanges as I do from the day job, except that income is tax free (because UK law does not recognise it as a taxable trade - another debate); and I spend a lot of time watching, reading and understanding changes in the gambling industry because a significant chunk of my savings income comes from it.

The UK went through almost everything the US is going through right now some years ago, where problem gambling led to suicides and people struggling to pay bills. Multiple measures have been taken that seem to have directly helped that situation: VIP programs have been scrapped; advertising is being limited; and, you may have to prove you can afford to bet the levels you're betting at to an operator, which is an incredibly unpopular move (who wants to send their pay slips to their bookie?), but does seem to have quelled things a little.

However there is more to do, and there is something you can do right now if you are losing money and want to reduce the impact these products have on you.

Stop playing casino and video slot games. Focus on sports only.

The myth is that the problem gamblers are losing their money on 2nd Division Nigerian netball games in the middle of the night. Yes, there are some people who are looking for sports action all the time, but that's not the biggest source of problems.

With sports, you have a little time to think. I recommend not playing in-play unless you have automated that solution to find EV and its executing for you (I know people who make money doing this on Betfair in the UK). Bet before game only, and you will have a built-in "cool off" period.

You don't get that with casino games or video slots. Its relentless, and you can lose thousands an hour before you even realise what is happening.

And then, there's EV. Expected Value. Sometimes (actually, kinda often), the odds a bookmaker puts up are a bit wrong.

Not every price, it might be a prop bet on a particular player, and they're putting a price up on a Monday for a Saturday game, and you have a spreadsheet that dings something and tells you what the kelly stake should be and you put 1% of your bankroll on it, and then you might sell it back on Saturday morning when the market has got right or you let it ride (and there's maths to tell you when to do that and when not), and you ride some variance but make money.

That's not possible on casino or video slot games. They just bleed you. There is no EV. If you win, you got lucky (the scientific name for this is "experienced positive variance"), and you should run away quickly before you lose it back. But the sure way to win on those games is the same as in Wargames: don't play at all.

I'm biased, I realise that, but I would love to see the outlawing of casino and slot games on mobile.

I would also like to see more education in schools around probability and statistics (the founder of SIG, a storied institution who is now a market maker on Kalshi, the prediction market platform), argues that the fascination with calculus in schools might have helped during the space race, but today we need people to really understand Bayes theorem more than anything else. I agree.

If you want to start your own education in how to bet a little smarter and lose a little less, I can recommend The Logic of Sports Betting [0] and its sequel Interception [1]. I also like Dan Abrams' book [2], that talks about expected growth, not just exepcted value.

These are not get rich quick schemes, but it will give you an idea of what goes on in the minds of people who try and take this all very seriously. You'll still need to think about modelling and how to get your own prices to compare with those you're being offered, but if you're not prepared to do that work, what is it you're actually doing?

[0] https://www.amazon.com/Logic-Sports-Betting-Ed-Miller/dp/109...

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Interception-Secrets-Modern-Sports-Be...

[2] https://www.amazon.com/But-How-Much-Did-Lose-ebook/dp/B0DRZ2...

Post reply on HN