Remote View
Lemmy today
Lemmy today
189 comments
-
-
Your definition of "legitimate casino" excludes any casinos that rig games.
All businesses with financial operations are exposed to money laundering to some degree.
Regulations increase costs to implement. Only "legitimate casinos" fight them.
-
It's YOUR definition ahahah I literally took what you said and I am asking a question.
YOU said, legitimate + fake = online. I asked to which you applied the answer and you said online. Now you are saying it doesn't?
So, do we agree that legitimate casinos don't rig games?
Also, you mentioned taking a cut to help laundering money, now you are retracting saying "are exposed". No dude, taking a cut has intentionality behind, being exposed is a natural risk for any business which moves money. You claimed the first.
So, one last time:
- do legitimate casinos rig games?
- do legitimate casinos help laundering money?
-
It's YOUR definition
Nope. It's you who is obsessed with separation of "legitimate casinos".
YOU said, legitimate + fake = online. I asked to which you applied the answer and you said online.
Correct
Now you are saying it doesn't?
Incorrect.
So, do we agree that legitimate casinos don't rig games?
You have defined legitimate casinos as ones that don't rig games.
Also, you mentioned taking a cut to help laundering money,
Incorrect. I said casinos are used to launder money.
now you are retracting saying "are exposed".
No retraction necessary.
- do legitimate casinos rig games?
Online casinos rig games. You have defined legitimate casinos as ones that don't rig games. A normal internet user cannot tell the difference.
- do legitimate casinos help laundering money?
Yes. Not necessarily knowingly. Income from internet gambling is tainted.
-
Your quote:
Here’s the definition I’m happy with. Legitimate casinos = established businesses in the casino industry Fake casinos = scammers Online casinos = legitimate casinos + fake casinos
You forgot already? A link to your own comment.
You have defined legitimate casinos as ones that don’t rig games.
I didn't define shit, you defined legitimate casino as a partition of online casino.
Look what triple jump you are making to avoid saying a very simple thing: legitimate casinos, defined as YOU did (established businesses in the casino industry) don't rig games. All because you can't admit to be wrong :)
So, I will ask once again:
- do legitimate casinos, as in YOUR definition, rig games, according to you?
Yes or no question.
Yes. Not necessarily knowingly. Income from internet gambling is tainted.
I would argue with this point, but I won't. It doesn't matter, I accept the theoretical possibility of money laundering. For some reason I was mistakenly taking the top comment of this thread as your comment. I even quoted it several times and you didn't note that that's not your comment... my bad.
-
I didn't define shit
Here is your definition (not mine) where you separate "legitimate businesses" from "scam organizations"
I'm saying this line is not clear cut, particularly for the average Internet user. A yes/no answer is not possible.
I was mistakenly taking the top comment of this thread as your comment.
Easily done. Thanks for clarifying.
-
Yes, but I am asking to answer according to your own definition! I specified it, I quotes it, I wrote YOUR in caps, I can't add flashing lights or I would.
You provided a definition, I am asking a simple question with that definition in mind.
According to YOUR definition, do legitimate casinos rig games?
Come on, how many more comments do you need to answer this simple query?
-
Online casinos rig games.
From the end user point of view, the subset of legitimate casinos (that, following your definition, don't rig or scam) cannot be easily identified.
-
I give up. You refuse to engage in good faith.
What user can tell is irrelevant, we are talking about your "taxonomy" and the properties that carries being in one or other category.
You might not be able to distinguish a legitimate casinos by a fake one, but if in your opinion legitimate ones also rig games, this is irrelevant. If they don't, then what users can tell is a completely separate problem.
-
we are talking about your "taxonomy"
No. That's what you are trying to forum slide to.
I'm sticking to the point that online casinos are scammy, including legitimate, regulated operators.
You might not be able to distinguish a legitimate casinos by a fake one,
Not just me. Any average Joe.
but if in your opinion legitimate ones also rig games, this is irrelevant.
Your doggedness for wanting agreement that some casino games may not be rigged is impressive
what users can tell is a completely separate problem.
But a problem very much related to "what's wrong with online casinos".
-
Indeed I want to make a distinction. Because thinking legitimate casinos rig games is completely different from thinking scammy ones do.
In fact, you had no argument whatsoever to prove those do, including your external sources that recommended basically in all cases to stick to licensed sites, proving that there is a difference (duh). On the other hand, having worked in the industry and understanding both how casinos integrate games and how compliance works, I have explained to you why there are generally not technical means AND no economic incentive for legitimate casinos to rig games.
I will repeat the points for you:
- legitimate casinos undergo certification and audits. Every piece of code change is analyzed periodically and so does the functionality of basically everything on the sites.
- most importantly, casinos don't develop games, they purchase them from providers. They don't have access to the code, as games are served directly by the maker, so they can't change the code to tweak odds.
- the game makers don't have any incentive of jeopardizing their whole business to let a customer earn more money illegally.
The above applies to essentially every licensed casino, every legitimate casino.
You failed to acknowledge any of these points, and you argued for 15 comments about scammy websites, bringing now the conversation back to where we started.
The reason why I want an agreement that legitimate (not some!) casinos don't rig games is specifically because I provided arguments (technical and economical) for why that's the case. So your refusal to make any distinction while also refusing to provide any proof to support your claim just results in a vague and messy discussion, exactly like your insane definition of "online casinos" that includes scam websites. You refuse to be accurate :)
But a problem very much related to "what's wrong with online casinos".
It's not. It's something casinos (real ones) can't do anything about, the same way banks or shops can't do anything about. This is an extremely tiny problem because official means exist to recognize legitimate ones since there are trusted authorities that certify them. In fact, given the existence of central national authorities it is much easy to be sure that a casino is legitimate than a shop, for example. I will tell you more: rigged games (and therefore fake casinos) are a MINOR problem in the industry in general. It is absolutely a terrible argument to say what's wrong with casinos, because it's something the vast majority of the people will never even encounter in a life of gambling. However, there are plenty of reasons why casinos can be considered bad based on the regular operations of legitimate casinos, not based on your fairytales.
So yes, I am stuck on wanting an acknowledgement that legitimate casinos don't rig games because I know how that works, unlike you. Here is how I conclude this conversation, since we are at a moot point:
If you fail to acknowledge tha rigging games is very very unlikely (I will keep the theoretical possibility in case there are suicidal CEOs) in legitimate casinos, then I will call your argument bullshit until you have any proof. Specifically, you should explain what economic incentive do legitimate casinos (licensed) to rig games, and how do you think they can do that. If you fail to provide any argument in support of this while also refusing to make a distinction in your original claim, then I know you are arguing in bad faith, so I will simply block you and move on.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
189 comments