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

Don't bet on the joys of pokies (2011)

grogsgamut.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 83 posts

Re: Don't bet on the joys of pokies (2011)

#61

Post by seabass-labrax »

bitwize wrote: post #44
brainwad wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's fun to have diminutive version of many words. And because it differentiates us from boorish Americans - or as they are also known in Oz, seppos.

I once saw a sign in Australia warning about crossing train tracks. In the land of the free, the sign would have all the coziness of a Secret Service agent: KEEP OFF TRAIN TRACKS - $100 FINE PER VIOLATION But this was Australia. So it actually read something like this: "Cross tracks safely and only at the provided walkways. Or cop a $100 fine. Don't say we didn't warn you, mate!"

For comparison, the standard text in Great Britain is exactly as follows:

  Warning
  Do not trespass on the Railway
  Penalty £1000

Re: Don't bet on the joys of pokies (2011)

#62

Post by brainwad »

seabass-labrax wrote: post #61
bitwize wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once saw a sign in Australia warning about crossing train tracks. In the land of the free, the sign would have all the coziness of a Secret Service agent: KEEP OFF TRAIN TRACKS - $100 FINE PER VIOLATION But this was Australia. So it actually read something like this: "Cross tracks safely and only at the provided walkways. Or cop a $100 fine. Don't say we didn't warn you, mate!"

For comparison, the standard text in Great Britain is exactly as follows: Warning Do not trespass on the Railway Penalty £1000

The actual signs in Sydney look like

  Danger
  Don't cross the tracks
  - use the bridge.
  Fines up to $5,500 apply.
(https://railgallery.wongm.com/cache/sydney-suburban/F121_540...)

Re: Don't bet on the joys of pokies (2011)

#63

Post by VelesDude »

Solvency wrote: post #17

what is it with Australians and having the cheesiest names for everything? pokies. electricians are sparkies. bikkie. spewie. budgie. brekky. it's like a bunch of babytalk only it's said by literally everyone.

Spoken like a real Gronk! Nah, your cool.

I suspect it is just something we picked up from our British heritage, the whole slang thing.

Apple and Pairs, Up the Stairs - all that.

I do find it funny when some folks have been here for a few years and they have picked up all the slang. Someone I used to know had been here for 10 years but still had a very thick Italian accent. It was always a joy when he would bust out a sentence like "I took the mars bar up the Tulla but it was right chockers. All I wanted for a Chook!". Translated, "I took the car up the freeway but there was a traffic jam. I wanted a hot chicken."

Re: Don't bet on the joys of pokies (2011)

#64

Post by eterm »

tennis_80 wrote: post #10

I started my career working on gambling apps, and it’s one of my red lines now when looking for work. It’s an evil industry - full of dark patterns. I remember implementing a “cancel withdrawal” feature where essentially: the casino could deposit money in a customers bank account in a day when they request it. They instead choose to hold it in a pending state for a week, and allow them to cancel the withdrawal at any…

The major UK sites have recently done a similarly dark move by adjusting their definition of "Depost Limit".

Used to be if you set, e.g. a £50/month deposit limit, then you couldn't deposit more than £50 a month.

They recently changed it to be a net limit, so if you withdrawl £500 after a win, you can now deposit £550.

While it can be argued that it still acts as a guardrail for maximum losses, it absolutely encourages problem gamblers to deposit more.

Re: Don't bet on the joys of pokies (2011)

#65

Post by csa »

Joker_vD wrote: post #11
beckthompson wrote: post #5

Man this article is sad. Being addicted to gambling really does suck the life out you.

I've played enough poker (and similar games) on computer (against bots, no real money) to know that 1) I am quite bad at assessing the expected value of my moves; 2) I am quite... what's the English word for someone who gets way too excited from the thrill of gambling and forgoes the caution? "Hasardeux" is French for it, but I don't think "hazardous" has that sense in English? Anyhow, I do know quite well that were…

There are several terms of art in poker that describe various versions of this:

action player — This is fairly neutral, and describes what I think you mean. Someone who likes to gamble. Sometimes these players are really bad, sometimes they are only sort of bad. These players make bank when playing against weak players who overfold and aren’t willing to gamble.

VIP — This is a polite way to say “donator”. Many/most action players are VIPs. Their attitude is that they can gamble in the pits or gamble at the poker table, and often times the poker table presents less bad (or even good) odds when compared to the house.

LAGtard — LAG is short for “loose aggressive”. LAG can be a very profitable style, especially when deep stacked. That said, LAGtards tend to play the style badly.

spewy — describes someone who puts a lot of chips into the pot, often times in questionable spots. Noun form is “spewtard”.

Re: Don't bet on the joys of pokies (2011)

#66

Post by mynameishere »

ElevenLathe wrote: post #53
andrewstuart wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Society pays a pretty high price for that casual fun for people like you. Maybe go see a movie instead.

Unfortunately, there's not a livable version of society where we "ban" gambling. Doing so just pushes it underground, and therefore inevitably into the hands of some kind of organized crime. I imagine the best compromise would be to create a state monopoly and make it easily (but not universally) available, while also trying to push some social stigma against it. Unfortunately for harmful vices like this, the anglosp…

just pushes it underground

Why is this an argument? So push it underground. As a rule, old folks aren't going to take their pensions to Fast Freddy's strip club backroom poker nights. People think that because a law doesn't work 100 percent, it shouldn't exist.

Re: Don't bet on the joys of pokies (2011)

#67

Post by MaxfordAndSons »

Joker_vD wrote: post #33
MaxfordAndSons wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess you're getting downvoted because people think you mean HN by "here", but you meant amongst gamblers. And you're right, it is the most apt term gp was looking for.

I definitely was not. "Courageous", "adventurous", "risk-taking", "reckless", "impudent", "bold", "daring", but with something that would mean "...almost and even to a fault or own peril", but without an inherent negative moral connotation is what I was looking for.

It doesn't have an inherent negative moral connotation when used amongst gamblers. It's been reclaimed, so to speak. But I suppose we're not amongst gamblers here, so, fair enough.

Re: Don't bet on the joys of pokies (2011)

#68

Post by ryandrake »

mynameishere wrote: post #66
ElevenLathe wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, there's not a livable version of society where we "ban" gambling. Doing so just pushes it underground, and therefore inevitably into the hands of some kind of organized crime. I imagine the best compromise would be to create a state monopoly and make it easily (but not universally) available, while also trying to push some social stigma against it. Unfortunately for harmful vices like this, the anglosp…

just pushes it underground Why is this an argument? So push it underground. As a rule, old folks aren't going to take their pensions to Fast Freddy's strip club backroom poker nights. People think that because a law doesn't work 100 percent, it shouldn't exist.

What do you think gambling-addicted "old folks" who live in areas where gambling is illegal do today? They either hop a short flight to a place where it is legal OR head to Fast Freddy's. People absolutely do participate in illegal gambling when legal gambling is off the table, whether they are elderly or not.

Re: Don't bet on the joys of pokies (2011)

#69

Post by seabass-labrax »

brainwad wrote: post #62
seabass-labrax wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For comparison, the standard text in Great Britain is exactly as follows: Warning Do not trespass on the Railway Penalty £1000

The actual signs in Sydney look like Danger Don't cross the tracks - use the bridge. Fines up to $5,500 apply. ( https://railgallery.wongm.com/cache/sydney-suburban/F121_540... )

That's arguably a lot better than the British ones:

- They give an safe, alternative action, which might not be obvious to some people.

- They state the authority by which the fine is issued (too small to read fully from the photograph, but something like "...Regulation 2003"). Interestingly, a historical railway sign preserved at Beamish has the name of the officer by whose authority the fine would have been issued at that time[1].

- The fine is given as 'up to' the maximum. As I understand it, the British fine is only £1000 if it can be proved that the violation was made wilfully, and non-wilful trespassing is usually (perhaps always?) only subject to a fine if done subsequent to having received a warning.

[1]: https://www.deviantart.com/rlkitterman/art/NER-Public-Warnin...

Re: Don't bet on the joys of pokies (2011)

#70

Post by arduanika »

nicolas_t wrote: post #8
kristofferR wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I was sorely disappointed, that's not what I associate with pokies at all.

yeah I somehow read that as pocky and was confused for a bit.

Agreed that wouldn't make any sense. You can always bet on the joy of pocky!
Post reply on HN