Slashdot Mirror
Cheating Fruit (Slot) Machines
ebbdr writes "Ever think that fruit machines cheat you? You would be right, at least in the UK. This article provides proof that fruit machine outcomes are predetermined and that the players inputs have little, if anything to do with it. And it lets you download the emulators and machine code required to test the hypothesis for yourself...."
The Random Number Generator (RNG) can be
made to change its percentage by simply changing it's seed number. There
are several ways this cam be done.
1) Change the Eprom Chip with a new program and/or seed number which any
computer technician can change a chip.
2) Use an Eprom that has a cyclic program that will keep changing the
seed number after predetermined numbers of cycles.
3) Posibly change the seed number through a signal from the master
computer or mainframe. There is no doubt that all these machines are
hooked up to the mainframe for monitoring and/or recording data for
expert review. It is known fact that comp cards and players records
are fed back to the mainframe, why not other data.
It is for this reason why I am an advocate for all Gambling to come under
a Federal or State controlled Gambling Commission. All of what I say is
not intended to infer that there is any tampering with slot machine
programs and controls. I can only say from my experience as a computer
programmer, that if the possibility exists, the probability resides.
Therefore only an astute Gaming Commission that can oversee these
computers and their control, will clear up this doubt and mistrust about
slot machines.
...because if this had happened in the US, lawyers would have already delivered a C&D to get the website shut down, and the guys who uncovered this would've been slapped with a huge DMCA lawsuit over their duplication of the functions of the machine on a PC.
The issue of massive, provable fraud (of which Joe Average is the victim) would have been glossed over in favor of the copyright infringement nonsense (of which Huge Heartless Corp is the "victim").
Wrong. In the US, the slots are indeed random, although of course the odds are balanced in such a way that the house wins in the long run.
The difference between a game of chance and a scam is that a game of chance has fixed odds while a scam has fixed outcomes. If the British fruit machines are in fact behaving as described, their outcomes are fixed and they are a scam.
Sorry, but no. On the machine tested, the pre-determined outcome of losing affects a chance to improve the winnings on an original bet. Either collect the 40p winning now, or gamble on high/low for the chance of a 60p win. Thus it is a gamble, which should carry with it the chance of actually winning.
As stated, this equates to selling raffle tickets where there's no winning number - dishonest and should be illegal.
~Cederic
From the article: "And in almost all cases, no matter what you chose, the result would be the same.",
Almost? Hmmmmm.
Anyway, what does it matter? Everyone knows that those machines have always given out less than they take in. What difference does it make what method they use? My dad has an old British slot machine that is 100% mechanical. Even it has dials inside that allow you to increase or decrease payouts to players. Anyone who buys a slot machine intends to make money with it. If it was a gamble to own the machine, nobody would. Vegas slots are all wired together to collectively "rip you off". Is this really a news flash to anyone?
If you can't afford to lose the money, you shouldn't put it in the machine.
Apparently the 'proof' that sliot machines, fruit machines as those wacky brits choose to call them, is that, if you 'freeze' the state of a fruit machine at some point and then repeat the next step, the machine will generate the same outcome.
If I'm not mistaken, a RNG, once seeded, will generate the same sequence of random outcomes given the same seed. What's been proven is that the RNG isn't reseeded after every roll of the wheels.
Does this mean the outcome is predictable? Hardly. And not by a long shot does it mean the fruit machine is cheating. Since it's not possible to go back in time and respin the wheels in real life, the fairplay campaign has proven absolutely nothing.
Well, let's be fair. They've proven that a fruit machine, after a cold reboot, seeds its RNG the same way every time. As a result, if you were to play the machine in exactly the same way from a cold boot twice, the outcome would be the same. As soon as a player starts doing things differently, the outcome will once again become unpredicatble. (For those not familiar with European fruit machines, they're a bit more interactive than the American slots. You'll often have the option to 'hold' certain reels, or to play double or nothing on a win, for example.)
Seems to me that all you have to do is work out a winning sequence for a given machine at home on your emulator, or, if the RNG is different for each machine, on the machine itself, then make sure you're the first one in the casino every morning when they turn the things on. You'll clean up every time.
Now who's cheating?
I want the fire back.
Reading this article I can't help but wonder what this group is thinking. Just because the outcome of the next roll is figured out ahead of time doesn't mean it wasn't randomly generated. It was just randomly generated earlier than anticipated.
Also, note that casinos are based on statistics, not on regulating individual payouts. While on the whole the casino will always win due to the massive scale it operates on, there is the opportunity for individual players to beat the odds and leave with more money than they came in with. Not allowing the player to win, with no element of chance whatsoever, is illegal almost everywhere. I imagine that this would fall under fraud laws at the very least, due to the fact that these machines are advertised as gambling devices based on random events.
That's it. I'm no longer part of Team Sanity.
I know it's a great /. tradition not to read the articles, but, for once, could you make an attempt?
To summerise the problem, the ROM shows that the outcome of slot machines is predetermined. In the acticle it gives an example:
"The machine has a number reel, with numbers from 1 to 12. On the reel a "10" is showing. Should you go Higher, or Lower?"
Apparently the machine doesn't pick a number at random from 1 to 12 and compares that to your guess of higher or lower. Instead it is predetermined whether you win or lose, so whichever button you press doesn't matter.
An emulator enables you to save and restore previous states, so that you can find out what would have happened. In this case, the author/s of the piece are saying that slot machines are predetermined things, at least in part.
This is probably illegal, as the machine is strongly implying that your guess will affect your chances (higher than 10 is less likely than lower than 10), which is shown to be untrue. It's almost like having a fixed dice game. In a fair game you'd expect to have 1/6 chance of winning when you roll a dice. In the above slot-machine example you'd expect a 1/6 chance of winning if you pressed Higher, and a 3/4 chance of winning if you pressed Lower, and this isn't the case.
The example they have is that, if you follow the sequence on this page, the machine reaches a point that's supposed to be a gamble, but in fact you cannot win. And it's not because the output is predetermined, or the seed is the same and it happens to be a losing bet. It's a high/low gamble, so you should have a chance to win regardless of what the seed was. But if you pick high the machine picks low, and vice-versa. An 'honest' machine would pick the same number regardless of which button you picked.
Of course, the legal/ethical issue is more complicated than the simple mechanical issue. The basic problem is that machines are never fair, and cannot ever be fair because their purpose is to redistribute money from your pocket to the machine owner. The large number of people who seem to think that gambling is ever fair are deluded or naive. And the problem with the specific machine referenced above is that it has the extremely difficult task of mapping a percentage payout (they mention it's probably 70%) to a more fair operation (high-low with a pair of dice). Therefore, it has to cheat sometimes to ensure it doesn't payout too much. Which is perfectly legal, and really is the only way to do it. If they actually get a law passed saying that machines cannot cheat in any circumstance, it will mean the end of gambling, because no owner in their right mind would take a real gamble, where they could lose all that money they've been raking in.
except that they're British, which means that thsi comment has feck all to do with disclaiming responsibility, and everything to do with taking the piss.
If you bought a slot or "fruit" machine, or knew the owner of one who gave you permission to toy with it - I'm under the impression that it is illegal to pull copyrighted (and possibly patented) code off of the chip and redistribute it without permission of the copyright owner.
Also, as far as I know - The unauthorized review or redistribution of copyrighted code is theft.
.sig wanted: Must be concise, funny, and display my cleverness.
Actually, the Vegas casinos don't cheat. They don't have to. Take roulette. They pay 35 to 1 on a winning spin. Now there's 38 numbers on an American wheel, 1-36 plus 0 and 00. That's 37 to 1 odds of winning a 35 to 1 payout. If the wheel's honest, the difference between those is 5.26%, which is the house's edge. If they don't cheat, they will get 5.26% of the money you play over the long run. This same thing applies to just about every other game on the floor, be it slots or blackjack or craps or whatnot.
It's only "just about", though. You can spot the exceptions by a simple question: who are you playing against? In craps and blackjack, for example, you're playing against the house. The house will win over the long run. In poker, OTOH, you're playing against the other players. The house just acts as bank and neutral dealer, and takes their cut from every pot. That's because in poker there's no house edge.
Sure, with computerized slots and such the casino could cheat, but why risk it? Nevada Gaming Control, believe it or not, is honest and all but incorruptible, and they've got enough experience that any cheating scheme a casino could use will be spotted pretty quick. The house gets their money, with honest games the nickel slots alone will pay the bills for the entire casino and everything else including the pit is pure profit. Why risk that gravy train for an extra fraction of a percent for maybe a year tops?
Let's take a simple 5 symbol slot machine. With a mechanical device, the player can know they're a loser when the second wheel stops. A video slot machine can keep the suspense going right up until the last symbol... oh look! Two bars! Three! Oh sweet Jesus a fourth bar! That's 5K if the next bar comes around!
At this point, speaking as a programmer, I'd make damn sure that the winning symbols just drifts past the window before flashing the "Deposit another $5 to NUDGE?" button.
Since you have total control, the programmer can make the sucker believe they are coming arbitrarily close to winning without actually paying out anything. The idea is to give the sucker a lift, a high, a thrill. A glimpse of that "big win", that will keep him/her putting the money in.
Not illegal. Just behavioural conditioning. The same thing B.F. Skinner did with pigeons.
In his experiments the pigeons were taught to repeatedly peck a switch to get a small food reward. If the food was delivered after set number of pecks (even dozens), the bird would only peck away when it was hungry. But if the reward (food) was delivered after a random number of pecks, the bird eventually came to peck at the button continually, even frantically.
A slot/fruit machine is nothing more than a behavioural conditioning machine that skillfully supplies small, random rewards, all the while sustaining the belief in the player that the big reward is just waiting for the next game.
Illegal? No. Ethical? Well, gambling is a tax on the stupid.
I'm a longtime Nevada resident and agree with the entire point of your post. However, your point of contention is somewhat unrelated to the point of the article. The article is stating that the machines are rigged in a quite different way than Nevada slot machines.
It's saying that these slot machines are programmed for you to lose. For example, say you have a '2' onscreen and you have to choose between higher (up to 10) and lower (down to 1). If you pick 'lower', you lose, and if you pick 'higher', you lose as well. These machines have no winning possibilities in certain situations, which is NOT something that IGT does!
The sad thing is that the very rich often believe they're richer than others because they're smarter or better than others.
If a corporation is a personhood, is owning stock slavery?
If the random number distribution is a memoriless one, then it does not matter. Classic american innumeracy, and it got modded up ...