They'll all be arrested
they will
Google has agreed to let Play Store customers court cruel mistress Lady Luck. A spokesperson confirmed to The Register that, as of August 2, the store formally allows gambling apps. Folk in the UK, Ireland and France are part of this experiment. According to Apple's Developer guidelines, the Apple App Store allows gambling …
Does this mean we can have the disembodied floating head of Ray Winstone shouting out of our phone screens now?
And when we get augmented reality glasses connected to our phone it will also join in?
So you're walking down the road. Then the sat-nav says, "turn left onto Acacia Avenue."
Then Ray pipes up, "there's a little old lady crossing the road there. Bet in-play now! Will she be crushed by the oncoming lorry, or will it stop in time?"
"Would you like an accumlator on her poodle also surviving?"
Are gambling apps allowed on iPhones? I'm not sure it would make such a big difference in market share, but maybe I underestimate how many people want to gamble with real money on their phone.
Interesting that they specify not to use Google's payments platform. Looks like they are scared of legal issues. Or maybe they worry about morals. (Seriously! Google doesn't allow ads for guns either)
I presume that Google are happy for others to do the work required to police their own small part of the 'net (given they won't allow usage of their payment system)
For example - I imagine that the National Lottery app will be cleared in due course, given that they already (presumably) already do the age checking required to allow players to buy tickets using a credit/debit card from it (they also have a ticket checker app that has no payment processing at all - which I believe has always been available as a result)
Sigh.
Special characters add one letter to the available alphabet.
Adding an EXTRA character (even from a limited alphabet) is MUCH more secure (in brute-force terms).
A 9-character, letters-only password has 2.7trillion combinations.
An 8-character, password from your average keyboard symbols (Alphabet in both cases, numbers, plus a bunch of printable and easy-to-enter symbols, about 80-something possible characters) has just over half as many combinations (1.7tn).
Stop using special characters, and just add another random character from those available to your password. APASSWORD is stronger than P4SSWORD (obviously DON'T do that, it's just an example).
Those that understand gambler's fallacy and gamblers.
Many games have *an element* of chance. I have never heard backgammon described as 'gambling', even with random dice throws.
If chance is all there is, then yes, it's gambling. Betting on horse racing is gambling, because you're watching the gee-gees from a distance, and you have no influence over the outcome.
Poker is considered gaming,not gambling, because all the players have the same element of chance, and you are *actively taking part and playing the game yourself*. If you have more skill, then you will win more often than not. Explain how pro poker players consistently win against random online players.
So anything with an element of chance is gambling? I mean golf has an element of chance, if your ball takes a bad hop or a drive down the middle ends up in a divot. But it is a game of skill when two players of different skill levels compete.
Same with poker, if I play the winner of the 2017 WSOP heads up, I might be able to beat him in the short run by being lucky with the cards, but in the long run he's going to crush me, because he's the top player in the world and I'm the 50 millionth best or whatever.
You can call it anything you like, but as far as I'm concerned if there is a finite possibility of losing value in a transaction when you are hoping to come out ahead, you are gambling.
That said, all y'all don't wager when playing backgammon and golf? Sounds to me like someone glossed over a vital portion of your education! Ice hockey, on the other hand, I'm always too busy to think about betting ...
Life's a gambol. One we all lose, eventually.
I never said there was no skill in poker. What I said is that playing poker is gambling. Why are you trying to convince me (yourself?) that the two are mutually incompatible?
If you use that definition any wager is "gambling". If I say "I'll bet you $100,000 you can't walk a straight line for a block" and hope you are so nervous over the large bet that you stumble, you're saying that's gambling even though it is purely a test of your "skill" in walking a straight line.
There's a difference between "I'll bet I can bench this 225 lb weight 10 times in under 20 seconds" and "I'll bet that bird sitting on the wire flies away in the next 20 seconds". You can lump them both together under gambling, but one is essentially completely random and the other has zero element of randomness, and it completely related to my strength/skill.
By your definition all investment is "gambling". If I buy a stock or an ounce of gold, I don't know it will go up in value. It might go down. Is it "skill" on my part if the stock I choose and the time I choose to buy it means it goes up? Or is just dumb luck? After all, supposedly 80% (or was it 90%?) of restaurants close within 5 years after opening. If I invest a million bucks to open a restaurant, if it is a big success is that all skill? Or is there maybe a lot of luck involved, if the only other restaurant in town burned down a month after I opened?
"If you use that definition any wager is "gambling"."
If there is any element of chance involved, yes. By definition.
Trying to invent some kind of sliding scale based on "skill" or "ability" whilst trying to draw attention away from that element of chance is sophistry at best, and a con at worst. Or perhaps an attempt at justifying one's gambling addiction.