Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Betting Against Online Gambling

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the roaches-under-the-fridge dept.

175

conq writes "BusinessWeek.com has an article looking at the possible consequences if anti-gambling legislation is passed. From the article: 'Just how much of a setback is the proposed legislation for the $12 billion industry? While online gambling companies generate half their sales from U.S. gamblers, the industry is operated almost completely by companies beyond the reach of U.S. regulators. [...] It's a lot of smoke and mirrors and misstatements.'"

cancel ×

175 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Who cares? Gambling is for niggers anyway (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724048)

nt

Re:Who cares? Gambling is for niggers anyway (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724103)

The world series of dice?

Sure is a good thing... (4, Insightful)

Atario (673917) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724056)

...that there's nothing else important going on the country or the world, so Congress can address the dire scourge of online gambling.

Re:Sure is a good thing... (3, Insightful)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724063)

But gambling is against the scripture, while depriving citizens of their freedoms isn't.

Re:Sure is a good thing... (2, Insightful)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724188)

I, for one, like gambling along with the lottery. It is a tax on folks who cannot do math.

Re:Sure is a good thing... (2, Funny)

Nuskrad (740518) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724255)

Don't worry, they're not banning the lottery. They need lottery balls to clear out the tubes [youtube.com]

Re:Sure is a good thing... (1, Informative)

drsquare (530038) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724591)

I can do maths, and considering that £1 a week is small enough to effectively be £0 a week, and that several million is enough to retire on comfortably, the odds are infinitely favourable.

Re:Sure is a good thing... (2, Funny)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724802)

the odds are infinitely favourable.

Like I said. A tax on people who cannot do math.

Re:Sure is a good thing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724880)

this should be fun. do the "let's be sensitive to everyone" mods win and troll this guy to -1? or do the people who realize what an idiot the gp is win, and this guy gets modded to +5 insightful? only time will tell.

Re:Sure is a good thing... (4, Insightful)

Vellmont (569020) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724883)

You assume there's no value in a lottery ticket beyond the actual payoff. Sorry, but you're wrong. What people are buying is the CHANCE at winning the lottery. It's a fantasy of being able to do whatever they like for the very low price of $1 or a pound. Many people judge the value of that fantasy as being worth far more than the cost of a lottery ticket. It's not about being "bad at math" as you say, but about mentally ignoring the overwhelming odds that you're not going to win, if only for a little while. That doesn't mean you don't know you're extremely unlikely to win, you just don't think about that so you can enjoy the fantasy. I don't play the lottery because I can't easily ignore the fact that I'm not going to win. Other people can do that, and as the poster pointed out it's a trivial amount of money to buy a lottery ticket. You're not really hurting yourself as what else of more value can you really spend $1 on?

Re:Sure is a good thing... (1)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724891)

You are quite right. If the entertainment value of the ticket is worth more than the 60% difference (usually more) between the purchase price, and expected payoff (remember the taxes ladies and gentlement), then go for it.

However, if the fantasy value of winning is what you consider entertainment, then I'd suggest that the person either cannot do math, or they are able to delude themselves. I am not a fan of either possibility.

Re:Sure is a good thing... (1)

locofungus (179280) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724851)

14 million to one odds, with an expected jackpot payout of 3 million on a 1GBP stake. It's a stupid way to gamble.

Gambling on red/black 22 times at roulette carries odds of 7.5 million to one with a jackpot payout of 4 million on a 1GBP stake. (think that is right - IIUC there are 37 numbers of which 18 are red and 18 are black - think there might be 38 numbers in the US)

Alternatively, if you want it more like the lottery pick five numbers from 0 to 36 (duplicates allowed) and then gamble them on the roulette table. I assume the casino pays 36 x the stake so that's odds of 7 million to 1 paying 6 million

(of course, I doubt that there is a casino that would allow you to keep doubling your stake every time for 22 goes so you might need to move casinos when your stake starts exceeding the floor limit. When you get to the very large stakes you'll probably have to take 10k or so out to pay for a holiday to monte carlo)

If you want to gamble on the lottery for a bit of fun and give a bit to charity on the side then that is fine (personally I give directly to charity, not only does my money go to the charities that I want but I get tax relief on the donation as well) but the odds are very poor compared to other "pure luck" gambling if you are doing it because there is an outside chance of winning the jackpot.

Tim.

Oline poker is stupid - it's easy to cheat (1)

spineboy (22918) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724806)

Since there are a fixed amount of cards in the deck, and since there is nothing to prevent one person, or a group of friends using teamspeak, then it's realatively easy to figure out what cards are being played, and thus swing the odds.

I recall some programs available that would do this for you. Only idiots would do this and not expect to lose money.

Not against Scripture (3, Informative)

CustomDesigned (250089) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724544)

There is no direct mention of gambling in the Bible. Proverbs advises, "Wealth quickly gained is quickly lost", which applies to gambling. Gambling as entertainment is perfectly compatible with Christian morality. And yet, there are good reasons why the knee jerk reaction of most Christians is "Gambling is Evil". It is a similar problem to alchohol or tobacco. They have seen too many lives ruined by gambling addiction.

As soon as a gambler's money ceases to be an expense (like movies or gaming software), and he begins to hope or depend on a lucky streak to solve his financial problems, the gambling becomes an evil addiction. Mathematical ability is not the issue, gambling addiction is irrational. It is a spiritual problem that puts hope of financial salvation in an eventual win.

Sometimes people with excellent math ability can win consistently at games like BlackJack. In my opinion, this is wrong also. An honest casino is a form of entertainment. They would be up front about the house percentage built in to all the games. The card counter again turns gambling into an income rather than an expense. Often successfully, to be sure, but it is like a quick change artist robbing a movie theatre.

In real life, of course, most Casinos seek to exploit gambling addiction for profit, rather like Tobacco companies exploiting nicotine addiction. Casinos with such sleazy motives in turn create a sleazy atmosphere around the Casino. The campaigns to ban gambling have the same motivation as the campaigns to ban smoking.

There have been some attempts to create wholesome Casinos. The main idea is that you buy tokens which cannot be redeemed for cash (same idea as pinball machines), so there is no temptation to look to the games as income. Such a Casino would probably qualify as "not gambling" under anti-gambling laws. Of course, playing this form of "gambling" is like smoking nicotine-free tobacco.

Re:Not against Scripture (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724592)

Then the correct path to take is to provide help for those who can't gamble responsibly, and allow those who can to play. Trust me, my $6 tournament once or twice a week is not going to break me (even ignoring the fact that I've won money over time). THe best route would be to legalize US gambling sites, tax them, and make them set aside a portion of those profits for gambling addiction treatment.

Re:Sure is a good thing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724953)

Except for bingo. Bingo is fine. As long as it's held in a place of worship.

It's not about gambling, but taxes (1)

argoff (142580) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724313)

...that there's nothing else important going on the country or the world, so Congress can address the dire scourge of online gambling.

Seriously, there is something important. The war in the middle east, and this law has everything to do with it. I myself am somewhat sympathetic to the war, but the simple honest truth is that the government simply can't pay for it. Really, Congress could care less about people who are down and out from gambling, but they care alot about people escaping the overbearing and unjust taxes by moving their money to offshore tax havens. This has nothing to do with gambling, and everything to do with attempting to contain that flow of money (and tax revenue).

PS: the war on drugs is used in a similar way.

Re:Sure is a good thing... (1)

smchris (464899) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724368)


Give our Congress credit where credit is due. They've prioritized on-line gambling behind flag burning, gay marriage and the threat our lettuce-pickers pose to national security.

I don't know. It seems that when the U.S. passes a law the rest of the world is supposed to obey it so are most of the servers really out of reach? Join the army and see the world? I don't think so. See Iraq maybe. But every month it seems like you read about the FBI raiding someplace in Russia, South Africa, etc. etc. Join the FBI if you want to see the world is my advice. They should be renamed GBI for "Global".

Re:Sure is a good thing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724448)

But if nothing was done you'd be bitching about that too. "Look at all the money Bush is sending out oof the country, whaaa, whaa"
The only way it will stop for you is if Billary is Prez and Al Franken is VP. Then it would be "Look how we are helping other countries with our disposable incomes, yeah Dems! Long live Billary!!"

Re:Sure is a good thing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724693)

No, the only way for it to stop would be if the US submitted to EU rule and if a Euro child molester was chosen as absolute leader of Euro-America. We won't settle for anything less.

Re:Sure is a good thing... (1)

DannyO152 (544940) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724677)

Let's say your constituency, or better still, the constituency of your party's leaders, include the good citizens who work in and own the glass and steel gambling houses. Let's also imagine that recent hurricanes destroyed many gambling houses (which were on the water due to legislative hyprocrisy) leaving many of your voters without a job and leaving quite a few [Republican, we don't raise taxes, ever] state and municipal governments without tax revenues until and if the casinos rebuild. Well, a little economic protectionism and interference in the free market might start to look like a good thing. And check out the conribution score. Naturally, contributions from casino and race track and wealthy Native American interests -- plus, since it looks like addressing a "vice," in come the accolades and huzzahs and dollars from the theocracy crowds. That's so win-win baby. It's positively K Street.

Adverts (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724058)

So, will this outlaw all those internet ads where I can win something by spanking the Monkey? Or was that punching the Monkey? Maybe that's why I never win..

Re:Adverts (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724125)

That's a good business model for slashdot.... I'd pay $5 to punch scuttlemonkey.

Re:Adverts (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724168)

That's strange. I win every time!

It will have little effect long term... (4, Insightful)

spagetti_code (773137) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724069)

FTFA:
encourages financial institutions to deny Internet gambling transactions


So the gambling sites will move offshore. The banks and credit card companies will not want to lose that massive
source of transactions, and will find a way to continue those transactions. There is no explicit restriction on them.

There's too much money at stake here.

Re:It will have little effect long term... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724088)

Financial instutions already deny deposits to online gambling sites. In order to make a deposit one has to set up an offshore account and make transactions from there.

Re:It will have little effect long term... (1)

wolfie_cr (779921) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724695)

As someone that works in the gaming industry (offshore) I can tell you that this is incorrect

Re:It will have little effect long term... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724096)

The banks and credit card companies will not want to lose that massive source of transactions, and will find a way to continue those transactions. There is no explicit restriction on them.
Actually, there is. Most of the capital in the international banking system is controlled by the US, as has been the case since the early 1900s, and the three largest international credit card systems were created by and are still almost entirely controlled by US interests.

Re:It will have little effect long term... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724116)

And let me clarify that I also think this has been a good thing for economic development.

Re:It will have little effect long term... (2, Insightful)

Ulrich Hobelmann (861309) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724112)

Not just money, there are many many people involved, that like Poker, betting, and what not.

Why prohibit what ordinary citizens might actually *want* and like? Smells awfully like fascism.

Re:It will have little effect long term... (1)

ZeonMan0079 (926241) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724309)

Smells awfully like fascism.

Sir! Welcome to Neo-Con America!

As per TFA:

"find another way to get his gambling fix: more Friday nights in Vegas."

and: "The Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act also allocates $10 million a year for three years for prevention of illegal online gambling."

10M/year against a 12 Billion highly mobile industry?

Re:It will have little effect long term... (1)

Surt (22457) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724822)

Indeed, drug legalization here we come!

Re:It will have little effect long term... (5, Informative)

zaphod_es (613312) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724114)

The gambling sites are offshore already, this proposal is an attempt to stop Americans using them by blocking transfers of money to and from them.

You are right that there is too much money at stake to stop it. This is yet another example of the Canute effect [wikipedia.org] where people believe that merely making a new law or regulation necessarily achieves the desired effect. Have the legislators forgotten prohibition?

Re:It will have little effect long term... (1, Interesting)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724275)

Not all of it will go offshore. You can expect a lot of Indian reserves to set up server farms on Indian-controlled land. This way, even if the credit card companies are forced to stop allowing online deposits, there's nothing to stop anyone from going to the local reserve and swiping their debit card, or having a friend who lives nearby deposit some cash.

Re:It will have little effect long term... (1)

mindstrm (20013) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724518)

And then how does the reserve get the money out of the country and to the offshore casinos?

If this were workable solution, it would already be happening... US banks blocking gaming transactions against credit cards is already a huge pain for offshore casinos.

Re:It will have little effect long term... (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724808)

f this were workable solution, it would already be happening

Its already being done by these people: http://www.mohawk.ca/default.php [mohawk.ca]

If you check the "policies" section, they allow gambling sites:http://www.mohawk.ca/policies.php [mohawk.ca]

Kahnawake Mohawk Council also reserves the right to establish licensing of, and regulation/monitoring for specific industries (such as on-line gaming) to ensure that fair, equitable and ethical business practices are maintained throughout.
They've even set up a native gaming commission, all in accordance with US law, even though they're in Canada: http://www.mohawk.ca/kgc.php [mohawk.ca]
Kahnawake Gaming Commission The Kahnawake Gaming Commission, established on 10 Ohiari:ha/June 1996 pursuant to the provisions of the Kahnawake Gaming Law, MCR No. 26/1996-97 (the "Law"), is presently comprised of three members appointed by the Mohawk Council of Kahnawake. The members of the Kahnawake Gaming Commission are: Alan Goodleaf, John K. Diabo and David Montour.

Expect to see other native communities on both sides of the border emulating this model.

Re:It will have little effect long term... (1)

tisme (414989) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724475)

Actually you are wrong... credit card companies are scared of gambling transactions for several reasons.

A) They are more likely to be fraudulent
B) Gambling addicts are more likely to max out and then declare bankrupcy
C) They are being pressured from various sources to stop these transactions

The proof is there. Several huge companies such as MBNA outrightly do not work on gambling sites. Others treat gambling credits as cash advances. Even paypal, which has little to worry about chargebacks etc. because they guaruntee funds through a bank account and extensive identification has banned gambling transactions.

Coming from a gambling addict.... (5, Interesting)

cfeedback (467360) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724079)

...I'm glad I've managed to stay away from gambling online. If I had ever gotten into it, I probably wouldn't have this PC and net access to comment on this article. The two states I've lived in my whole life, Oregon and Nevada, are #2 and #1 in gambling addiction per capita (too lazy to provide links, but google it if you'd like) respectively. I've seen many friends who have wrecked their lives with gambling, and have come damn close to wrecking my own.

I'm sure this bill will be denounced on slashdot, but I really don't think of it as *that* evil. Sure, there are plenty of legitimate online gambling sites, but many of them are there solely to rip you off of your hard earned dollars, and often times people (unfortunately) cannot tell the difference. Maybe, just maybe, our elected legislators have our best interest in heart this time.

I mean in this day, is anyone really more than a few hours away from an Indian casino? Do you really need 24/7 access to gambling? It might be that the very few hours of distance is all that saves a lot of people from their self...

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724089)

I know exactly how you feel. As an IT equipment addict, I've spent a fortune on new hard drives, new monitors, CPUs' RAM etc. in the past year alone. When they've finished with gambling hopefullt they'll ban IT sales next. Oh, and then everything else. Won't someone please think of the consumers?

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724295)

I know exactly how you feel. As an IT equipment addict, I've spent a fortune on new hard drives, new monitors, CPUs' RAM etc. in the past year alone. When they've finished with gambling hopefullt they'll ban IT sales next. Oh, and then everything else. Won't someone please think of the consumers?

... and after that, maybe they can ban food. I must be addicted, I have to eat several times a day! Obviously not everyone is similarly addicted - look at Celine Dion - she not only can't sing, she obviously doesn't eat, either!

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (1)

thegma (976793) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724133)

As far as sites that are trying to rip you off, isn't that the obvious reason to legalize and regulate online gambling? And doesn't it seem that if this were an altruistic move by congress to save us from the ills of gambling, that playing the ponies wouldn't still be kosher?

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (2, Insightful)

gowen (141411) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724279)

Coming from a non-gambling addict: Are you seriously suggesting that I shouldn't be allowed to gamble because you can't handle it?

Gambling is not chemically addictive. Its time for you to take some personal responibility for your lifestyle choices.

mnb Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724491)

Anything that stimulates the pleasure circuits can be chemically addictive. The only difference is that between external (drug) stimulation and internal (reward center) stimulation.
The effect of neural programming is identical.

Re:mnb Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (1)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724975)

So we should ban anything enjoyable?

There's no need for people to have physical sex anymore. Why allow people to do it?

Re: Making the world safe for everyone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724286)

Um...It's not the government's job to save people from themselves. It's the government's job to keep other people from hurting you, and to keep you from hurting other people. If the gambling sites are just ripping people off, that's a problem that should be addressed ("other people hurting you"). If the sites actually do pay out at random, then they're as legitimate as brick-and-mortar casinos and shouldn't be illegal.

This bill IS evil in that it attempts to take freedom away from responsible adults. Some people are alcoholics, but that doesn't mean getting a drink in a bar should be illegal. In the same way, some people are gambling addicts, but that doesn't justify making on-line gambling illegal. Addicts should find help for themselves.

For people with a gambling addiction: Firefox has an "adblock" feature that can help. Block "http://www.mypersonalonlinecasino.com/*" and on-line gambling is no longer available to you.

Finally, for the gambling addict who stayed away from on-line gambling: props to you. Your strength in overcoming your problem daily is a testament to your character. I wish you the same happy and full life I wish for the rest of the world.

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (1)

Matt Edd (884107) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724288)

many of them are there solely to rip you off of your hard earned dollars

I gamble online on many different sites and none of them have tried to rip me off nor have I heard of any of them ripping people off. These sites are making so much money from being ligitimate that there is no reason for them to rip you off. If you are worried about the few small ones that may then only go to ones with a good reputation. Check out site like http://www.flopturnriver.com/ [flopturnriver.com] to help you out.

is anyone really more than a few hours away from an Indian casino

No.. but why pay 10% rake at a live game when you can pay 5% rake and multitable poker. I can easily make 10x more money in a day online compared to a casino... and all while watching Good Eats [foodtv.com]

Maybe, just maybe, our elected legislators have our best interest in heart this time.

Maybe, just maybe, they do. But maybe it isn't their place. Maybe they should outlaw places like Check Into Cash that truly prey on the people with money problems.

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724307)

The Indians already run internet casinos http://www.mohawk.ca/policies.php [mohawk.ca]

Kahnawake Mohawk Council also reserves the right to establish licensing of, and regulation/monitoring for specific industries (such as on-line gaming) to ensure that fair, equitable and ethical business practices are maintained throughout.

Not even the Mafia wants to tangle with the Mohawks, so forget about the government shutting them down.

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (1)

mindstrm (20013) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724946)

Actually, Mohawk Internet Technologies (Aptly named MIT) is only a hosting provider for online gaming operations... they don't operate the online casinos themselves.

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (1)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724329)

Maybe, just maybe, our elected legislators have our best interest in heart this time.

The job of elected legislators is not to look after our best interests. It is to serve our stated interests.

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724935)

The job of elected legislators is not to look after our best interests. It is to serve our stated interests.

If someone from another planet were examining the actions of Congress in an attempt to determine their motivations, they would likely decide that most laws are passed in order to create, maintain, and strengthen the profits of organized crime.

If you don't believe the laws benefit organized crime, just try growing your own 'medicinal herbs' or brewing your own whiskey, or opening your own casino, or arming yourself better than the criminals, and see how quickly you're locked up. They hate competition.

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (2, Informative)

Mr2001 (90979) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724372)

I mean in this day, is anyone really more than a few hours away from an Indian casino? Do you really need 24/7 access to gambling?

Playing poker online isn't the same as playing in a casino, for a few reasons:

The strategy is different, because you can't see anyone's face.

There are a lot more clueless players online (read: people you can win money from), because what kind of rookie is going to play poker at a casino when all those table games are placed more prominently and easier to get started with?

In fact, there are a lot more players online in general, which means there are more games: you can always find the game you're looking for, at any bet level and any game type. 50 cent 7-stud? $5 Razz? 90 player Hold'em tournament? No problem. At a brick and mortar casino, you're limited to whichever tables happen to be open at the time.

You can play faster online, and you can play more than one table at once.

But perhaps most importantly, it's cheaper to play online. There's less rake (typically 5% vs. a casino's 10%), and the stakes are much lower: just try finding a live poker game where the minimum bet is 10 cents. Even $1 games are hard to find.

BTW, preventing online gambling won't prevent anyone from having 24/7 access to gambling. The card room down the street from my house is only closed about 4 hours a day. The Indian casino just outside of town is open 24 hours on weekends.

Maybe, just maybe, our elected legislators have our best interest in heart this time.

Ridiculous. If that's what they had in mind, they'd regulate online gambling instead of banning it - or they'd ban all online gambling instead of making exceptions for horse racing and state lotteries. (In fact, they'd probably ban state lotteries entirely if they really wanted to keep people from wasting their money on gambling.)

Nope... you know whose best interest is served by this bill (and Washington's recent ban)? Brick and mortar casinos. That's all.

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (2, Insightful)

walnutmon (988223) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724824)

Don't know how much poker you have been playing lately, but unless you are playing 1/2 cent games, I don't think it's accurate to say that people who play poker online are weaker than those in casinos.

Poker players in casinos are generally far worse than those that are commonly found online, not to mention, you can actually SEE how bad many of them are.

The advantage isn't that you make more money per hand online, it is that you can make a small advantage into a lot of money because you have the ability to play many more hands.

I know i'm kind of nit picking, but your post just stood out to me as not exactly helping any cause. If you want people to be behind gambling, you don't generally say... Gambling is good because you are all idiots and I can take your money, HAHA!

Hell, I don't even like online gambling now, poker players are pricks! :P

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (1)

Mr2001 (90979) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724897)

Don't know how much poker you have been playing lately, but unless you are playing 1/2 cent games, I don't think it's accurate to say that people who play poker online are weaker than those in casinos.

Well, I'll bow to your experience, because I do play at the lowest stakes. I'm not a professional and I don't want to risk $50 at the casino when I could risk $10 online.

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (1)

theLOUDroom (556455) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724389)

I mean in this day, is anyone really more than a few hours away from an Indian casino? Do you really need 24/7 access to gambling? It might be that the very few hours of distance is all that saves a lot of people from their self...

I'd say the problem isn't really gambling but the way our society allows gambling to be performed.

If you go into a bar and start slamming shots as fast as you can, the bartender has a responsibility to cut you off at some point.
They say, "You've had enough, go home."

No such regulation exists for gambling. Sure whatever regulation you came up with might be inconvenient and imperfect, but at least someone wouldn't gamble away all their money in a single night.
Current policy of letting the indians do it and virtually no one else is just plain fucktarded.

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (1)

Matt Perry (793115) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724794)

Sure whatever regulation you came up with might be inconvenient and imperfect, but at least someone wouldn't gamble away all their money in a single night.
Since when should someone tell someone else what they should do with their money? Let them piss it all away in one night if they want. It's their money and they can do what they want to with it, be it giving it all away, spending it on gambling, using it as a downpayment on a house, or putting it into their savings or an IRA.

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (1)

mindstrm (20013) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724913)

- There are responsible gambling acts/policies/etc in various places, whereby people can voluntarily have themselves blacklisted, and the casinos MUST honor this. Online casinos are starting to do this as well.
- Online casinos have deposit limits, daily/weekly/monthly. You can of course contact them to have these increased.. but it usually requires some paperwork, and has to be very deliberate on your part.

- Morality issues really ahve no place in the onlien gambling debate. They DO have a place in a a debate about gambling in general.. but when discussing online gambling, keep in mind that people DO have access to gambling... online gambling has been dead easy for the last 7 years or so, yet we don't see a widespread pandemic and financial ruin.. no more than we do with casinos everywhere.

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (0, Troll)

drsquare (530038) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724604)

So because you're mentally weak, you think you have the right to tell other people what they can and can't do?

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (1)

mindstrm (20013) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724958)

Do you really need 24/7 access to gambling?

Well.. you've had it for almost a decade already... and yet you haven't turned into a crazed gambling addict.. strange, eh?

Regarding "many sites are there to rip you off".. can you please elaborate? They certainly exist.. but do you have any figures to back up how many shady thiefs there are out there -vs- normal gambling operations?

Re:Coming from a gambling addict.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724977)

Using your argument...

I've heard some people can't control their alcohol consumption, maybe we should give prohibition another try. Cigarattes cause all sorts of problems, ban them too! And while were at it, lets do something about the obesity problem in America. Maybe we should ban fast food and soda?

What people seem to ignore is that the freedoms we enjoy come with responsibility. You are responsible for yourself. If you are addicted to gambling, deal with it. Don't expect me to give up something I enjoy just to make your life a little easier.

Sadly, most people will go along, simply because this doesn't affect them. Reminds me of my favorite quote:

"First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

Pastor Martin Niemöller"

See also . . . (3, Insightful)

bblboy54 (926265) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724091)

See also: Prohibition [wikipedia.org] .

Congress wants the money (4, Insightful)

eebra82 (907996) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724100)

The way I see it, the congress is worried about the billions of Dollars that's sipping out of the country. Online gambling will always be there, so if we don't want all the money to end up in hands of tropical islands, why not just vote for legalizing this industry instead?

I doubt the republicans are doing this to "save us" from the evilness of gambling. After all, the vast majority of all Americans gamble responsively. Blaming the industry too much would be like blaming television for murderers becoming who they are (read: artificial violence). If people have a problem with spending money, it will end up in pockets of other people no matter what, simply because gambling is only one way to canal it.

So once again, my point is, the US authorities should look at options of keeping as much of the industry within the US as possible instead of messing with peoples' habits and hobbies.

Re:Congress wants the money (1)

Zaphod2016 (971897) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724192)

I like poker. I play well. I enjoy a "night out with the boys" now and again, and am willing to piss away a few bucks on beer and small-antes. I play to win, but when I lose it doesn't hurt me any ($50-$100 tops).

I gamble responsibly.

I had a roommate who played online poker about 18 hours a day. He was doing so well that at one point he quit his job (it wasn't a good job) and began living entirely off of his poker winnings.

Then he had a bad week. Then he had a bad month. Then he admitted that not only had he lost thousands of dollars, he had funded this little project via credit cards at some 19% interest.

Don't kid yourself: gambling is dangerous (that's why its called gambling). I've seen some very clever, and otherwise intelligent people sucked into this trap. All of them were convinced it was a "sure thing" until it was far too late.

WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724312)

Don't kid yourself: gambling is dangerous (that's why its called gambling).

What would they have called it if it wasn't dangerous?

Posting ridiculous nonsense is annoying (that's why it's called posting ridiculous nonsense).

Re:Congress wants the money (1)

covertbadger (513774) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724359)

With all due respect, anyone who thinks they have a 'sure thing' can't be that clever or intelligent. If it was a sure thing, you wouldn't get odds. I bet fairly regularly on betfair, and during in-play sports events you see at least one 1.01 shot (odds of 1/100 - bet £100 to win £1) get beaten per week. The trick is to be a good judge of value, and pick the bets that represent good value - if you can do this, it is perfectly possible to make a profit. For instance, if I was able to back heads on a coin toss at odds slightly longer than evens, then over time I would make money (assuming the coin wasn't rigged), as I would win and lose a roughly equal number of times but each win would give me more money than each loss took away.

Re:Congress wants the money (1)

nutrock69 (446385) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724360)

- The way I see it, the congress is worried about the billions of Dollars that's sipping out of the country.

That's exactly it. From the blurb...

- "While online gambling companies generate half their sales from U.S. gamblers, the industry is operated almost completely by companies beyond the reach of U.S. regulators."

This is the entire problem. The online gambling companies aren't taxable. The real goal of this regulation is to get the industry to start begging to be taxed by the US just so they can continue that half of their own revenue stream.

GAGAA lawsuits against grandmothers coming soon? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724104)

( Government-Approved Gambling Association of America. heh, why not? )

If the bill is essentially toothless against offshore gambling operations, maybe they'll at least introduce criminal penalties against US customers of said operations.

It'd serve two very important purposes:
1: Make sure the "tax for people that failed math" has a shot of helping the US govt, instead of some offshore unamerican causes.
2: Help gambling addicts by fining and jailing them until they recover. It's a principle proven to work well with the War on Drugs, so it's really a no brainer to extend the concept here.

There is no downside.

... unless they are betting on horses (5, Funny)

dotwhynot (938895) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724118)

Jon Stewart on net neutrality and online gambling. [youtube.com]

Re:... unless they are betting on horses (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724251)

There's something inherently funny about seeing Sen. Stevens remarks about how the internet is made of "tubes" on a site called YourTube...

Re:... unless they are betting on horses (1)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724420)

Good to see its not just me that accidently calls it YourTube. Its YouTube technically.

In my home state of PA (4, Interesting)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724120)

They want to put more and more Casinos in suburban areas and in the city of Philadelphia if I recall correctly (all this pushed by the former mayor of Philly Ed Rendell, a democrat, I believe). They talk about all these wonderful things it will bring it like jobs and more revenue. What the politicians don't mention loudly is that they are also proposing giving the casinos a big break on property taxes, that casinos have to make money to pay revenue (hint: it doesn't come from the good of their heart), and the crime rate going up. It's not like they're planning to put up a technology center or something positive.

But this bill isn't about protecting people, it's about protecting revenue. Afterall, if you can sit in the comfort of your own home wasting your money on gambling, why go out and do state-sanctioned gambling (lottery tickets and casinos). What you can't tax, you ban.

BTW, for gambling proponents endorsing building Casinos as a public good, just go to Atlantic City (hey, if you are a Senior Citizen, just take the bus for minimum cash, like $10, and they give you that and a little more back in slotmachine tokens - hell, you can probably cash your social security checks there too), and look at the streets directly behind the casinos. One street behind the Boardwalk, it becomes a total dump. All show, no substance.

Re:In my home state of PA (4, Funny)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724200)

Please don't tell me Park Place and Marvin Gardens are also dumps! I expect that for Baltic Avenue, but not the yellows, greens, and dark blues.

US card networks can block gaming category code (5, Informative)

ad454 (325846) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724132)

All of the major card networks (VISA, Mastercard, AMEX, etc.) in every region now have a strict policy that online gaming sites require a valid gaming/casino licence from the jurisdiction they are based in, and must specify the gaming merchant category code 7995 in every authorization request. Merchant banks that do not enforce this rule with their gaming merchants risk losing their card membership. No bank wants to loss its VISA or Mastercard membership. Card networks are also banning the use of quasi-cash merchants from being used to hide gaming transactions.

If the US wants to stop its population from using online gaming sites, all that they have to do is dictate that the issuing banks in their country simply decline all authorization attempts which contain the 7995 category code. The US banks can also look at the merchant country codes, so that it can allow US based gaming sites like horse betting (which is legal in American but illegal in many countries) to be authorized, while still declining the overseas gaming sites.

Problem solved, since the vast majority of people using any type of Internet commerce, including online gaming, pay directly or indirectly with their credit cards.

I am sick and tired of politicians in one country expecting to regulate Internet activity of other countries, using broad extra-territorial legislation. This is impossible for online merchants and banks to enforce, especially since many countries have laws that contradict each other. Should we ban online sales of electronics globally, because they are illegal in North Korea? What about alcohol that is illegal in some Islamic countries? What about mediciations, mod chip, etc.? Even non-physical online software and services, including proxy agents, news & political websites, adult entertainment, etc. are banned in many countries.

Re:US card networks can block gaming category code (2, Interesting)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724176)

online gaming sites require a valid gaming/casino licence from the jurisdiction they are based in

And they are real hard to get in Panama, Sierra Leone, and Uzbekistan.

I know you are American, but get a grip - credit cards and the internet are world wide.

And anyone stupid enough to bet in circumstances where he is unable to detect whether he is playing against a computer that is programmed to cheat is probably doomed anyway. Why not send them to an asylum the moment the CIA monitoring shows they placed a bet? a lot of taxpayers dollars could be saved that way. - with Bush in charge, we can expect people to be extradited from places from Afganistan to Zaire for on-line gambling at any moment. I am not sure why America feels the need to import the worlds dumbest criminals, but far be it for me to stop them.

Re:US card networks can block gaming category code (4, Interesting)

BlueStrat (756137) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724186)

What's to stop U.S. citizens from simply transferring funds to an offshore bank or other financial entity that doesn't care about U.S. laws/regulations or gambling?

Are citizens going to be prevented from transferring any money or holding any bank accounts outside the U.S.? How would they stop someone from simply mailing the funds as a money order or using a "shirea"(sp?)-type money transfer scheme?

Short of requiring the government to exclusively handle all citizens' money, and outlaw *any* transfer of citizens' money outside U.S. financial control, I see no way they can possibly prevent them gambling online, or even collect enough data to prosecute them for doing so.

Of course, one could put on his tinfoil hat and argue that this is a step in the direction of the government seizing (more) direct control of citizens' money.

Myself, I just think it's another short-sighted lawmaking exercise that will end up curtailing freedoms and hurting the U.S. economy with more regulatory and enforcement costs while not actually accomplishing the goals that are espoused for it's passage, something that the U.S. government is legendary for.

Cheers!

Strat

The Gov. Monitors Financial Transactions (1)

arthurpaliden (939626) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724669)

They already do, they monitor all Swift transactions already suposedly to spot money going to terroists, organized crime, drugs its just an 'if statment' away from tracking payments to online gaming companies.

Re:US card networks can block gaming category code (1)

mindstrm (20013) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724397)

Several MAJOR US banks already deny 7995 transactions... and most merchants charge insanely high merchant fees for 7995 transactions, and it's been that way for years. If you try to run an online gaming operation using just credit cards flagged as 7995, half your customers won't ever be customers, they won't be able to deposit.

Without going into detail.. does anyone really think a billion dollar industry has just been sitting idly getting milked like that? Of course not.. they have many different deposit methods.

What about Entropia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724156)

Does this affect the game 'Project Entropia', where people can make tons of money playing the best video game ever? I would compare PE to professional sports or the CPL, and not to those online poker sites, since skill seems to matter more for making money than luck. Gaming skill, in particular. On a similar note, what about games such as WOW, where gold is traded for dollars, albeit against the game's policy? Playing WOW or PE could earn a player money, or they could purchase money and lose it. Are the modern MMORPGS considered gambling, just PE, or only the poker and sports betting sites???

Free Trade (1)

aersixb9 (267695) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724178)

What happened to the free exchange of money for goods and services? Are people no longer free to trade money with each other, and with companies that offer 'gambling' services? Regardless of location, Capitalism is all about trade. The government should not be able to limit trade between people and companies, as long as that trading is voluntary, regardless of what kind of company it is. If a person is too stupid to not spend all their money gambling, perhaps that is economic evolution? And perhaps if people were free to trade money for any goods and services, money would not be so tight for most people, and most people would not have to work all the time to earn enough to 'get by'.

The tough issue will be gambling ads (2, Interesting)

CurtMonash (986884) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724210)

While the government is good at stopping large financial transfers, it's lousy at stopping small ones. So if they really want to crack down on gambling, they'll have to go directly after the ads too.

But if you can't run gambling ads, I think a lot of current and potential future sports information sites will be in trouble. There are only so many retro jerseys their advertisers can sell ...

Odd though it may sound, the big losers from a real crackdown on internet gambling might be fantasy sports players.

And nobody's explained to me why internet gambling is worse than lottery tickets, which are just another tax on the poor and uneducated, and are actually promoted by government-funded advertising.

Re:The tough issue will be gambling ads (1)

Vexar (664860) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724402)

The only barely relevant difference between lottery tickets and online (or cellphone-based) gambling is accessibility and the rate at which your money can disappear on you. Imagine the guy who is up a 2:00am at a gas station 30 minutes outside of Tulsa. He decides to buy a lottery ticket. Scratch and Lose. Okay, maybe another one? Goes over, the clerk hands him another possible winner. Another loss. The guy eventually decides that going in and saying "Bet it all" and maxing out his credit card on Scratch-n-Lose lottery tokens maybe isn't going to fill the urge for him, and so he drops a five-spot down, asks for change in quarters, and hunkers up to the Galaga arcade machine for an hour.

Imagine that same guy fooling around with the internet gambling for hours at a time. The burn rate on online gambling is very fast in dollars per minute. The same guy who had to deal with a clerk to buy his Scratch and Lose instant-win ticket, plus fish out a bill from his pocket, or sign a credit card receipt is now just doing one-click-loser poker.

Imagine it this way: let's say you had to pay $1 for every 50MB of internet traffic to your system. You wouldn't see the dollars go by, would you? Even if you did, you would still be concentrating on your goal of doing whatever on the internet. The lack of the inhibiting transaction experience, the human contact, it removes the sense of conscience, and for obsessive people, it takes away some of the slow down, and they get further wound up/in debt.

Re:The tough issue will be gambling ads (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724922)

And nobody's explained to me why internet gambling is worse than lottery tickets, which are just another tax on the poor and uneducated, and are actually promoted by government-funded advertising.

Because in the lottery, when a player loses the State gets to keep the money. When an online player loses, somebody else gets to keep the money: in most cases, someone in another country that isn't even paying taxes to any of our various governments. And since Americans have only so much disposable income (and because of poor Congressional and corporate decision-making there's even less of that nowadays) the Feds would much rather we spend that "extra" money here.

House Always Wins (1)

Joebert (946227) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724219)

I wonder when law makers will wake up & realize they're betting on a game of whack-a-mole with trying to control gambling.

Takers? (3, Funny)

leipzig3 (528671) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724220)

I'll offer 2 to 1 that by this time next year, this industry will be even larger than the 12 billion it is now. Takers?

Re:Takers? (1)

mindstrm (20013) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724405)

Watch your terminology... I think you mean you'll BET that it will be even larger than it is now.
An offer would be the other way around.

JiHAD! jiHAD !! JiHAD !!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724239)

Holy JiHAD! there's gonna be hell to pay. Lebanon, Syria, and Israel are in some sort of war thing. Don't the Intelites make conroe in Isreal?

Stupid (4, Informative)

The Mutant (167716) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724246)

Whenever governments try to block capital flows from consumers to producers, money finds a way. Albeit, with some friction, but it gets there in the end.

This reminds me of the invention of Swaps; a financial instrument originally devised by banks as a means to provide a service helping multinationals circumvent capital controls imposed by the British Government [google.com] (warning: PDF).

I can see the formation of off shore entities that will sell a "service" to US consumers. Whatever the the facade (e.g., email, picture viewing, etc) of this service, the real purpose will be to enable US based consumers of online gambling to move offshore; by paying for the "service" the cash is then off governments radar.

Visit your favourite on-line gambling site and the funds you used to purchase the "service" are now magically available, minus some "friction", of course, to fund your gambling. Later another "service" would be used to repatriate funds back into the US.

There are loads of other mechanisms I can think of to get around this stupid law. Of course the government will find it necessary to establish policing actions to find / stop this avoidance, thus screwing the taxpayer a second time ("No, you CANT gamble online AND you have to pay me to make sure you DONT gamble online)".

Another reason I'm glad I don't live and pay taxes there anymore.

A ban is never going to happen (1)

99luftballon (838486) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724297)

The governments will have to make a deal with the inline gaming industry, in the same way the alcohol and porn industries have done. There is too much money in the industry and the user base has the broad spread of demographics to make any politician beat a fast retreat.

Anyone wanna bet? (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724323)

Anyone wanna bet if this legislation goes through? I'll put down $10 right now that it doesn't! Any takers?

Re:Anyone wanna bet? (1)

torchiere (988731) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724328)

Yeah man, I'll bite!

WTO (1)

mulhollandj (807571) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724332)

We have lost our ability to chose on online gambling. Because congress had surrendered some of our sovergnty to the WTO. Some countries claim they export online gambling and claim that we must import it.

take a piece (3, Insightful)

duffbeer (114852) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724380)

Folks, one hell of a lot of people like playing poker and gambling on the internet. Unfortunately, the rake from those games is ALL going offshore. Take note that this bill made it through the house but is not going to be matched in the senate.

This is just a warm-up. Legalizing online gambling so the feds and US corps can get their cut is the real goal. Ask yourself: why aren't the major US gaming corporations being extremely vocal on this issue?

Once again, The Right brings up an issue to legislate on moral grounds (gaining votes) only to collect behind the scenes (gaining $$$) when they later fulfill the interests of the corporations.

So all the Online gamblers switch to "day trading" (2, Funny)

NZheretic (23872) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724460)

So all the online gamblers switch to day trading [google.com] , which is entirely legal, with the inevitable result of a total f**k up of the US sharemarket.

Remember Spam? (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724596)

When Congress passed the CAN-SPAM Act, it made spam extinct, disappeared from every inbox. Now they'll wave a magic law and the world's online gambling compulsion will also disappear. The US is always much safer when Intarwebs experts like Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) [alternet.org] are protecting us from evil.
>/SNARK<

Of course that law is BS. It won't even stop outed Republican hypocrites like Bill Bennett [google.com] from gambling. It will get Christaliban to pull the lever (or touch the screen) for Republicans this November, along with Bush's threatened stemcell veto. As usual, its real power will lie in all the other unrelated corporate welfare clauses stuck under its figleaf that pass in stealth, while the mass media talks about only its sexy title.

If this bill passes, online gaming is DEAD (1, Informative)

sweetnjguy29 (880256) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724601)

A lot of people seem to think that since this internet gambling is hosted overseas, that therefore these companies are immune from the legal consequences of a US law. Not true. A State Attorney General or a Federal Prosecutor could bring a lawsuit against the company in the United States and gain jurisdiction over the company since it is doing business in the US. Once it has obtained a judgment in the U.S., the prevailing party would contact the government where the company is physically located and notify it that it has a judgment, using letters rogatory or treaty provisions to attach and execute on the US judgment in the foreign country. It is complicated, and often takes a few years, but it is effective. How do I know? I've done it.

Re:If this bill passes, online gaming is DEAD (2, Informative)

The Mutant (167716) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724706)

"...execute on the US judgment in the foreign country..."

But there are countries that won't honour US judgements and in fact even won't extradite criminals!

Cuba and The Dominican Republic are but two that come immediately to mind. I'd be surprised if Russia or Venezuela would rush to honor any US civil judgement, and Middle Eastern countries? Not a chance.

And as laws change these companies will move about, away from more restrictive regulatory enviromments to domains where enforcement is lax. You see this type of activity all the time with Hedge Funds (a biz that I've got some experience in); many funds, previously based in the Cayman Islands, are now moving further afield, in the South Pacific simply because many of the Carribbean regimes now will honour US Judgements.

Re:If this bill passes, online gaming is DEAD (1)

wolfie_cr (779921) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724722)

so having a website and selling something IS doing business in the US? interest concept this is, I supose that now I must be aware of all existing laws in the WORLD if I want to run a company from a small country in Central America for example? I guess this means that I amazon.com for example is subject to the laws of Costa Rica since they 'DO' business in Costa Rica right? how fun......'now' we are all subject to USA law.......I thought it was going to take a few more years but it appears that they moved a little fast LOL

Pirate Bay? (1)

mkw87 (860289) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724640)

the industry is operated almost completely by companies beyond the reach of U.S. regulators
So was the pirate bay? Look what happened there...

Re:Pirate Bay? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15724848)

So was the pirate bay? Look what happened there...

what happened ? its still up and running except with about n million extra users thanks to the publicity

the US and its megacorps is getting treated like the joke they really are in the rest of the world
as China says "USA is just a rounding error"

By Americans, for Americans: Your mission at home (2, Funny)

walnutmon (988223) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724775)

I applaud our government for getting tough on these criminal activites.

I know that some of you may think that it is your right to do what you wish with your money. But should we really have rights that could be harmful to some who excercise them? Hopefully this is only the first of recent steps that will lead to the elimination of wasteful and dangerous pass times from this nation.

Understandably, some would argue that there are many more things in this country that are dangerous. And I agree, these in time should be eliminated too.

Ciggarette companies sell heavily taxed items that WILL kill everyone who uses them, given enough time. Drug companies advertise all of there newest concotions on the easily scared. Pornography focuses on the sick and dark nature of humans, while exposing children to the danger of sex. Condom companies sell a product which makes sex with multiple partners seem reasonable and appealing to those who would otherwise, most likely, be spending their time doing things that will help the nation. Sex should be eliminated almost entirely, I have abstained, why can't everyone else? Car companies have ruined the atmosphere. Motorcycles are just crazy. Can you believe that we even let big strong dogs in our houses, without leashes?! How many lives have been claimed by dogs? More than zero, and anything more than zero cannot be tolerated.

Still, there are those that don't see the harm in online gambling. Most people have never tried it. But they will. What is stopping these online gambling sites from coming into your home, and forcibly taking all of your money? Is it a danger that we can really ignore?

Right now there are thousands of online poker professionals who make a living, often a very financially substantial living, playing poker from the comfort of their own home. They should be stopped imediately, so that they can stop making a lot of money for themselves, and start making far less money from the companies in America that have been set up to help America. Americans owe it to the rest of us to stop their search for alternative ways of living and conform to what the reasonable few in Washington have decided is good. Who could disagree with that? Who could disagree with a country by Americans, for Americans?

I believe that someday, we, as people, will come together and weed out everything that is bad and harmful so that we can all live lives filled with the pleasure of knowing that nothing bad will ever happen. Except old age.

Breaking US Laws in the UK (1)

Catmeat (20653) | more than 8 years ago | (#15724793)

It sounds like any UK based gambling operation will have to be doubly careful. Non-British slashdot readers may not be aware of the Natwest three [bbc.co.uk] case. Three British bankers have just been extratited to the US under a new "anti-terrorism" fast track extradition treaty. It has been alledged they carried out a fraud in the UK in connection with the Enron case. They've not been charged in the UK, no law was broken on US territory, the US had to provide a lower standard of evidence to carry out the extradition and the treaty is currently not reciprocal - the UK can't extradite Americans in the same way.

I bet operators of a UK based company, accidently doing bets with Americans, will probably be flying to the land of the free, in orange jump suits and leg shackles, so fast it'll make their head spin.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?