Live data from Hacker News

Addiction Markets

thebignewsletter.com

461–470 of 479 posts

Re: Addiction Markets

#461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather we actually deal with the issues causing these things than sweep them under the rug and pretend like it's an actual solution. > Build houses. That doesn't solve homelessness, as we build many houses in America but they aren't being filled with the homeless. You need to apply social services in a complex systematic approach to provide housing that people can afford sustainably, and rehabilitate and integrat…

Yes, building houses actually solves homelessness. Housing prices are the best predictor of homelessness and of course increasing supply of a good decreases its price. Why does the law of supply and demand not apply to housing? Sometimes the solution is very very simple and not at all complicated. Just build more.

> Why does the law of supply and demand not apply to housing?

Who said it doesn't? How well do you understand the law of supply and demand when you don't know what a price floor is? Ignoring that, do you think someone on the street can afford even a $1000 home? That's before we set aside that this of course only works if the houses being built are being done in a way that actively encourages prices to go down, rather than feed real estate speculation and continue to float a culture that sees a home as a capital asset.

So no. Building houses alone does not solve homelessness, again as evidenced by the fact that houses are built all the time in America, and homelessness is not getting better. How did you miss that?

Re: Addiction Markets

#462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I knew a guy back then who would blow hundreds every couple of weeks on booster packs. It was surreal to watch. MTG was everything to him. This was around 2002—2004.

A couple hundred every couple weeks doesn’t seem that bad for a hobby you enjoy

Good point. I should have included that at the time he really didn't have that kind of money to spend. We were young and he was struggling to even make rent or eat.

Re: Addiction Markets

#463
post #403
post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A generation of men?

The ads and apps are very much targetted at men. I have seen "some and few" gambling apps targetted at women. Traditionally too, gambling was more of a "male" issue. Also, the people loosing money on crypto, MtG and games with gambling mechanics tend to be more of men. It is kind of a gendered issue.

Does it disproportionately impact men because: - men are still expected to be financial “winners” in relationships - men adopt high risk strategies to accomplish such status - sports are essential to identity and social activity in 2025

Re: Addiction Markets

#464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In one sense, winning bets. If you lose, you lose: your money is gone either way. If you win, the fact that the probabilities sum to about 1.05 means you win less than you would have in a fair game. The state just takes a cut of that extra 0.05.

The probabilities sum to less than 1, not greater than 1, right?

If it's a win / lose outcome and both win and lose have a probability of 1/100, I'll make 99x my stake by betting on both win and lose at the same time.

If both outcomes have a probability of 0.999 (summing to almost 2), I'll barely make any money if I'm right, and lose my money if I'm wrong.

So when probabilities sum to less than 1, it's good for the gambler, and when they sum to more than 1 it's bad for them (and good for the bookkeeper).

Re: Addiction Markets

#465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no one is forced to do it Go tell that to joint bank accounts and family court.

Not being forced to open a joint account either… In all seriousness, all the pushback against paternalism comes from people who still believe in free will.

Were the children able to choose to be affected by their parents’ poor decisions?

Re: Addiction Markets

#466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should we also make sugar companies, coca cola/pepsi pay for people that become obese?

I would support taxes based on long term health effects. The sugar tax in Mexico had measurable impacts IIRC.

agree with taxing, but that's not what OP was suggesting

Re: Addiction Markets

#467

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 c…

Once they identify you as a consistent winner with EV>0 they ban you from their business. Happens also with government owned gambling companies.

That's not how exchanges or prediction markets work. They need - and welcome - sharp action.

Some bookmakers are marketing companies that will kill unprofitable accounts, but not all of them. It does not take a lot of work and research to work out who is who if you want to take this seriously, or how to make sure your account stays under the radar long enough, or even how to get around those mechanisms - some of those techniques may ultimately be considered fraud, however.

And if you don't want to take it seriously, what are you doing throwing huge wads of cash at it?

Re: Addiction Markets

#468
post #463
post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ads and apps are very much targetted at men. I have seen "some and few" gambling apps targetted at women. Traditionally too, gambling was more of a "male" issue. Also, the people loosing money on crypto, MtG and games with gambling mechanics tend to be more of men. It is kind of a gendered issue.

Does it disproportionately impact men because: - men are still expected to be financial “winners” in relationships - men adopt high risk strategies to accomplish such status - sports are essential to identity and social activity in 2025

That sounds more like post rationalization. Yes sports are essential to identity and that has zero to do with relationships.

But gambling is not high risk strategy to become rich. It is basically certainity to loose money strategy.

Yes, making gambling part of masculine identity is what many of those ads are trying to achieve.

Re: Addiction Markets

#469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taxing the dopamine thing does not discourage the doing of the dopamine thing. Just penalizes the addict and worsens their position.

This meta-analysis apparently found that alcohol taxes were effective for reducing alcohol consumption: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3735171/ Why should gambling be different?

For one, alcohol tax is applied at point of sale, so there is a friction on consumption. Gambling taxes are applied as though gambling is an investment activity and losses can even be justified. Second, most recent studies that look at the question classify gambling as more dangerous and addictive. There is much more of a path from gambling to suicide.

Re: Addiction Markets

#470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This meta-analysis apparently found that alcohol taxes were effective for reducing alcohol consumption: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3735171/ Why should gambling be different?

For one, alcohol tax is applied at point of sale, so there is a friction on consumption. Gambling taxes are applied as though gambling is an investment activity and losses can even be justified. Second, most recent studies that look at the question classify gambling as more dangerous and addictive. There is much more of a path from gambling to suicide.

>alcohol tax is applied at point of sale, so there is a friction on consumption. Gambling taxes are applied as though gambling is an investment activity and losses can even be justified.

Not sure what this means. Why can't gambling taxes just be applied at point of sale to create friction?

Post reply on HN