Broken Lotteries | Wired Science
wired.com
Broken Lotteries | Wired Science
1–10 of 13 posts
Re: Broken Lotteries | Wired Science
#2So Srivastava could determine a winning-vs-losing ticket by looking at it. What lottery out there lets you examine and play with tickets before purchasing them? Are you allowed to return an unscratched ticket for a refund?
Re: Broken Lotteries | Wired Science
#3"Lottery is a tax on people who are bad at math" just got more literal.
Re: Broken Lotteries | Wired Science
#4So Srivastava could determine a winning-vs-losing ticket by looking at it. What lottery out there lets you examine and play with tickets before purchasing them? Are you allowed to return an unscratched ticket for a refund?
The articles linked to in the OP (both of which have been discussed on HN before) provide a lot more detail.
To answer your specific question, Srivastava called the provincial lottery agency (iirc - it was Canadian) and asked 1) Would they send him a large number of tickets to use for a promotion / fundraiser, and 2) Would they "buy back" at face value any unused tickets. They said they would gladly do both - meaning he could examine before scratching, return unscratched, and also avoid lining up at the drug store to buy 10,000 tic-tac-toe tickets at once!
Edit: Previous discussions
Srivastava - http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2166555 Cash WinFall - http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2828122
Re: Broken Lotteries | Wired Science
#5"Lottery is a tax on people who are bad at math" just got more literal.
In these cases, yes. Of course there's also the more direct saying that lotteries are a tax on stupid people. But I don't see it that way. It's supposed to be a contract between a lot of poor people allowing one or more of them a chance at a "rich" life. If anything, it's a tax on desperate people.
Re: Broken Lotteries | Wired Science
#6Looked more into Cash WinFall, looks like they are trying to fix the lottery and are blocking gamblers from buying more than $5000 of tickets per day per terminal:
http://www.masslottery.com/about/news.html
Re: Broken Lotteries | Wired Science
#7I thought the winning tickets would be decided first, then filled with winning/losing numbers and symbols, specifically to avoid situations like this.
Re: Broken Lotteries | Wired Science
#8So Srivastava could determine a winning-vs-losing ticket by looking at it. What lottery out there lets you examine and play with tickets before purchasing them? Are you allowed to return an unscratched ticket for a refund?
The articles linked to in the OP (both of which have been discussed on HN before) provide a lot more detail. To answer your specific question, Srivastava called the provincial lottery agency (iirc - it was Canadian) and asked 1) Would they send him a large number of tickets to use for a promotion / fundraiser, and 2) Would they "buy back" at face value any unused tickets. They said they would gladly do both - meaning…
And it wasn't suspicious when the lottery got back a large number of unsold tickets broken off the reel?
I give Srivastava credit for finding and exploiting the loophole, but they also seem to be easily closable. So the scratchoff is vulnerable. Future ones might be as well. A little common sense and better security could avoid another mishap.
Re: Broken Lotteries | Wired Science
#9"Lottery is a tax on people who are bad at math" just got more literal.
In these cases, yes. Of course there's also the more direct saying that lotteries are a tax on stupid people. But I don't see it that way. It's supposed to be a contract between a lot of poor people allowing one or more of them a chance at a "rich" life. If anything, it's a tax on desperate people.
Yes, (a (non-broken) lottery might be a rational choice even for someone understanding the math behind it.
If you only have $20k and need $0.5M for an urgent life saving operation, then the expected payoff for not playing is -$20k (death) and it's -$20k+(some non-negative value representing the win) for spending all of your money on tickets.
Re: Broken Lotteries | Wired Science
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
In these cases, yes. Of course there's also the more direct saying that lotteries are a tax on stupid people. But I don't see it that way. It's supposed to be a contract between a lot of poor people allowing one or more of them a chance at a "rich" life. If anything, it's a tax on desperate people.
Yes, (a (non-broken) lottery might be a rational choice even for someone understanding the math behind it. If you only have $20k and need $0.5M for an urgent life saving operation, then the expected payoff for not playing is -$20k (death) and it's -$20k+(some non-negative value representing the win) for spending all of your money on tickets.
It doesn't even need to be that desperate. I understand the math, and I play the lottery every once in a while for the same reason that perfectly rational people visit casinos: it's fun and carries a non-zero chance of a payoff that is more life-changing than the money I spend on it. Being stupid is not a requirement.
We spend our money on plenty of things that offer negative monetary returns in exchange for pleasure, comfort, and entertainment. Premium beer, in my case.
Besides, it's not constructive to consider only the straight monetary expectations of lotteries when discussing their socioeconomic implications. Poor people are generally not buying tickets because they think it's the mathematically correct move.