I'd rather see them have to include the bandwidth cap on the plan, paired with how much use at max speed per day this allows you. People should be able to see that 2GB = 64 MB / day = however quick that phone/4G plan can suck down 64MB
Yeah I'm not a giant fan of Red box but I've never heard of this happening, and its never happened to me either. Antecdotal, of course. Like the other poster who responded to you, I'm also in a large American metro area where there are probably 10 mcdonalds / walmart / grocery store red box kiosks within a few miles of me.
Sure -- just that he (as an end user) went to the effort of generating a unique and strong password, and still gets screwed with all the '12345' types. Obviously he can't stop an attack on the site's shit security, just an observation that it double-sucks for him.
To draw a wildly out of proportion analogy (this is Slashdot, after all), it's like watching someone who never smoked die of lung cancer alongside someone who had been smoking for 65 years.
Fair enough question. I think this should put to rest the mostly AC poster who are claiming that slot machines aren't independent trials.
Regulations of the Nevada Gaming Commission and State Gaming Control Board, Regulation 14.040 Minimum standards for gaming devices (I apologize for the incoming wall of text, I'll bold the stuff of relevance to this discussion)
14.040 Minimum standards for gaming devices. All gaming devices submitted for approval: 1. Must theoretically pay out a mathematically demonstrable percentage of all amounts wagered, which must not be less than 75 percent for each wager available for play on the device. (a) Gaming devices that may be affected by player skill must meet this standard when using a method of play that will provide the greatest return to the player over a period of continuous play. (b) The chairman may waive the 75 percent standard if the manufacturer can show to the chairmanâ(TM)s satisfaction that this requirement inhibits design of the device or is inappropriate under the circumstances, the device theoretically pays out at least 75 percent of all wagers made when all wagers are played equally, and the device otherwise meets the standards of subsections 2 through 6. A waiver will be effective when the manufacturer receives written notification from the chairman that this standard will be waived pursuant to this paragraph. A waiver of this standard pursuant to this paragraph is not an approval of the device. 2. Must use a random selection process to determine the game outcome of each play of a game. The random selection process must meet 95 percent confidence limits using a standard chi-squared test for goodness of fit. (a) Each possible permutation or combination of game elements which produce winning or losing game outcomes must be available for random selection at the initiation of each play. (b) For gaming devices that are representative of live gambling games, the mathematical probability of a symbol or other element appearing in a game outcome must be equal to the mathematical probability of that symbol or element occurring in the live gambling game. For other gaming devices, the mathematical probability of a symbol appearing in a position in any game outcome must be constant. (c) The selection process must not produce detectable patterns of game elements or detectable dependency upon any previous game outcome, the amount wagered, or upon the style or method of play. 3. Must display an accurate representation of the game outcome. After selection of the game outcome, the gaming device must not make a variable secondary decision which affects the result shown to the player. 4. Gaming devices connected to a common payoff schedule shall: (a) All be of the same denomination and have equivalent odds of winning the common payoff schedule/common award; or (b) If of different denominations, equalize the expected value of winning the payoff schedule/common award on the various denominations by setting the odds of winning the payoff schedule in proportion to the amount wagered or by requiring the same wager to win the payoff schedule/award regardless of the deviceâ(TM)s denomination. The method of equalizing the expected value of winning the payoff schedule/award shall be conspicuously displayed on each device connected to the common payoff schedule/common award. For the puposes of this requirement, equivalent is defined as within a 5% tolerance for expected value and no more than a 1% tolerance on return to player or payback. 5. Must display the rules of play and payoff schedule. 6. Must not automatically alter paytables or any function of the device based on internal computation of the hold percentage. 7. Must meet the technical standards adopted pursuant to section 14.050. 8. Except for devices granted a waiver pursuant to subsections 1(b), or 8, each gaming device exposed for play in the State of Nevada by any gaming licensee, including an operator of a slot machine route, must meet the standards a
Just because it uses pseudo-random numbers, doesn't mean that the past spin (or the past 1,000,000 spins) has any impact at all on the current one, which was the point of this whole derail
So are you claiming that for your project, if there was one jackpot in the 5,000,000 generated spins, and the very first gambler got lucky and won that jackpot, and then the next 4,999,999 plays would be spun by gamblers for months with no real shot at the jackpot?
I thought I was on Slashdot, where a majority of people understood probability and statistics. I suppose it's not 1999 anymore. I'm literally a comp sci dropout and this isn't that hard for me.
Did you read the text of that Wikipedia article? I'll highlight the important words:
The winning patterns on slot machines - the amounts they pay and the frequencies of those payouts - are carefully selected to yield a certain fraction of the money played to the "house" (the operator of the slot machine), while returning the rest to the players during play.
Suppose that a certain slot machine costs $1 per spin. It can be calculated that over a sufficiently long period, such as 1,000,000 spins, that the machine will return an average of $950,000 to its players, who have inserted $1,000,000 during that time. In this (simplified) example, the slot machine is said to pay out 95%.
Notice where no one programmed the thing with any logic about when to pay out? They are relying on math to handle the payouts. The machine IS truly random, they just structure the pay table in such a way that it pays off x% of what it takes in OVER time.
Consider I offer you stupidly simple slot machine. It "spins" a fair six sided die. One dollar per spin. If you get a 1,2,3,4 or 5, you lose. If you get a 6, you win the jackpot, $5.
It should be relatively simple to see that on average, you'll put $6 into the my machine for every $5 you pull out.
6/5 =.0833333 -- I'm paying out 83% on every dollar wagered, making money hand over fist, yet my machine is still dumb as a brick and "purely random", just like Twinbee suggested in the post I was replying to.
In the short term you might roll a whole bunch of sixes and kill me, but in the long term, my casino full of thousands of these machines will make me a millionaire.
Can you see now how that is truly random, yet I can confidently post an "83%" without rigging the machine to do so?
Real slot machines are just variations on the above, with more intermediate prizes, way more combinations, and a lot of bells and whistles.
It may well be rolling a die on a central server, but I guarantee you that server doesn't have logic like, "if machine #2222 wins, don't pay out to #2222 (or anybody) again for x spins". It would be super illegal.
And you're right, in the hypothetical freak scenario where a machine jackpots twice or 3 times in a row, they will investigate it, much like I"m sure they'd investigate a guy who won the lottery jackpot back to back, legitimately, even if he was truly just lucky enough to win a 1 in quadrillions sort of shot. My point is that the machines aren't programmed to prevent it, that would be illegal.
Your friend is full of shit, slot machines pay out consistently over time due to math. It could literally jackpot 10 times in a row or never in the machines lifetime, it's just freakishly unlikely.
Slashdot Mirror
Men = hunters. Women = gatherers.
Buy your wife animal crossing for the Wii. Mine was hopelessly addicted.
You can still hunt fish in it. :-)
(she can 'gather' fish in it). Fun for all.
I'd rather see them have to include the bandwidth cap on the plan, paired with how much use at max speed per day this allows you. People should be able to see that 2GB = 64 MB / day = however quick that phone/4G plan can suck down 64MB
Then why in bloody hell can't I drag and drop music from iTunes to my iPhone? I though apple was all about drag and drop.
Yeah I'm not a giant fan of Red box but I've never heard of this happening, and its never happened to me either. Antecdotal, of course. Like the other poster who responded to you, I'm also in a large American metro area where there are probably 10 mcdonalds / walmart / grocery store red box kiosks within a few miles of me.
You have the whitest taste in music ever.
Sure -- just that he (as an end user) went to the effort of generating a unique and strong password, and still gets screwed with all the '12345' types. Obviously he can't stop an attack on the site's shit security, just an observation that it double-sucks for him.
To draw a wildly out of proportion analogy (this is Slashdot, after all), it's like watching someone who never smoked die of lung cancer alongside someone who had been smoking for 65 years.
I kind of feel for this guy:
uanzmg@fpfzxc.com | tZxHgJNlpRERQEkK
as he clearly put some effort into a difficult password and still got fucked.
Once they legalize, can't you just grow that shit outside? LIke tomatoes?
You're browsing the web without Adblock Plus? I'm nonplussed! You're nonplussed!
This is all 100% true, but yet waving your hands to play a game still sucks.
You should probably look into more fuel efficient cars if driving to the store and back eats through 20 gallons for you.
No they aren't:
http://gaming.nv.gov/stats_regs/reg14.pdf
Section 14.040
Fair enough question. I think this should put to rest the mostly AC poster who are claiming that slot machines aren't independent trials.
Regulations of the Nevada Gaming Commission and
State Gaming Control Board, Regulation 14.040 Minimum standards for gaming devices (I apologize for the incoming wall of text, I'll bold the stuff of relevance to this discussion)
14.040 Minimum standards for gaming devices. All gaming devices submitted for approval:
1. Must theoretically pay out a mathematically demonstrable percentage of all amounts wagered, which must not be less than 75 percent for each wager available for play on the device.
(a) Gaming devices that may be affected by player skill must meet this standard when using a method of play that will provide the greatest return to the player over a period of continuous play.
(b) The chairman may waive the 75 percent standard if the manufacturer can show to the chairmanâ(TM)s satisfaction that this requirement inhibits design of the device or is inappropriate under the circumstances, the device theoretically pays out at least 75 percent of all wagers made when all wagers are played equally, and the device otherwise meets the standards of subsections 2 through 6. A waiver will be effective when the manufacturer receives written notification from the chairman that this standard will be waived pursuant to this paragraph. A waiver of this standard pursuant to this paragraph is not an approval of the device.
2. Must use a random selection process to determine the game outcome of each play of a game. The random selection process must meet 95 percent confidence limits using a standard chi-squared test for goodness of fit.
(a) Each possible permutation or combination of game elements which produce winning or losing game outcomes must be available for random selection at the initiation of each play.
(b) For gaming devices that are representative of live gambling games, the mathematical probability of a symbol or other element appearing in a game outcome must be equal to the mathematical probability of that symbol or element occurring in the live gambling game. For other gaming devices, the mathematical probability of a symbol appearing in a position in any game outcome must be constant.
(c) The selection process must not produce detectable patterns of game elements or detectable dependency upon any previous game outcome, the amount wagered, or upon the style or method of play.
3. Must display an accurate representation of the game outcome. After selection of the game outcome, the gaming device must not make a variable secondary decision which affects the result shown to the player.
4. Gaming devices connected to a common payoff schedule shall:
(a) All be of the same denomination and have equivalent odds of winning the common payoff schedule/common award; or
(b) If of different denominations, equalize the expected value of winning the payoff schedule/common award on the various denominations by setting the odds of winning the payoff schedule in proportion to the amount wagered or by requiring the same wager to win the payoff schedule/award regardless of the deviceâ(TM)s denomination. The method of equalizing the expected value of winning the payoff schedule/award shall be conspicuously displayed on each device connected to the common payoff schedule/common award. For the puposes of this requirement, equivalent is defined as within a 5% tolerance for expected value and no more than a 1% tolerance on return to player or payback.
5. Must display the rules of play and payoff schedule.
6. Must not automatically alter paytables or any function of the device based on internal computation of the hold percentage.
7. Must meet the technical standards adopted pursuant to section 14.050.
8. Except for devices granted a waiver pursuant to subsections 1(b), or 8, each gaming device exposed for play in the State of Nevada by any gaming licensee, including an operator of a slot machine route, must meet the standards a
The universe, and all the roulette balls and dice in it, are also a very large state machine.
That's just false, every spin is an independent trial. At least in the United States.
Pedantry.
Just because it uses pseudo-random numbers, doesn't mean that the past spin (or the past 1,000,000 spins) has any impact at all on the current one, which was the point of this whole derail
I think you're right, and that's a completely valid and real world scenario.
His description of "This means that the longer one type of slot at a casino doesn't pay out, the higher the odds are that they will soon."
is just 100% incorrect. Every pull is an independent trial.
So are you claiming that for your project, if there was one jackpot in the 5,000,000 generated spins, and the very first gambler got lucky and won that jackpot, and then the next 4,999,999 plays would be spun by gamblers for months with no real shot at the jackpot?
I thought I was on Slashdot, where a majority of people understood probability and statistics. I suppose it's not 1999 anymore. I'm literally a comp sci dropout and this isn't that hard for me.
Did you read the text of that Wikipedia article? I'll highlight the important words:
The winning patterns on slot machines - the amounts they pay and the frequencies of those payouts - are carefully selected to yield a certain fraction of the money played to the "house" (the operator of the slot machine), while returning the rest to the players during play.
Suppose that a certain slot machine costs $1 per spin. It can be calculated that over a sufficiently long period, such as 1,000,000 spins, that the machine will return an average of $950,000 to its players, who have inserted $1,000,000 during that time. In this (simplified) example, the slot machine is said to pay out 95%.
Notice where no one programmed the thing with any logic about when to pay out? They are relying on math to handle the payouts. The machine IS truly random, they just structure the pay table in such a way that it pays off x% of what it takes in OVER time.
Consider I offer you stupidly simple slot machine. It "spins" a fair six sided die. One dollar per spin. If you get a 1,2,3,4 or 5, you lose. If you get a 6, you win the jackpot, $5.
It should be relatively simple to see that on average, you'll put $6 into the my machine for every $5 you pull out.
6/5 = .0833333 -- I'm paying out 83% on every dollar wagered, making money hand over fist, yet my machine is still dumb as a brick and "purely random", just like Twinbee suggested in the post I was replying to.
In the short term you might roll a whole bunch of sixes and kill me, but in the long term, my casino full of thousands of these machines will make me a millionaire.
Can you see now how that is truly random, yet I can confidently post an "83%" without rigging the machine to do so?
Real slot machines are just variations on the above, with more intermediate prizes, way more combinations, and a lot of bells and whistles.
boo and yah. linebreak.
They do, the original poster is just full of shit.
It may well be rolling a die on a central server, but I guarantee you that server doesn't have logic like, "if machine #2222 wins, don't pay out to #2222 (or anybody) again for x spins". It would be super illegal.
And you're right, in the hypothetical freak scenario where a machine jackpots twice or 3 times in a row, they will investigate it, much like I"m sure they'd investigate a guy who won the lottery jackpot back to back, legitimately, even if he was truly just lucky enough to win a 1 in quadrillions sort of shot. My point is that the machines aren't programmed to prevent it, that would be illegal.
Well, yes, i suppose it would be prevented from happening because they might yank it, but not due to any of its internal programming.
Your friend is full of shit, slot machines pay out consistently over time due to math. It could literally jackpot 10 times in a row or never in the machines lifetime, it's just freakishly unlikely.
Because he isn't a sociopath, and enjoys shared experiences with fellow human beings.
It works in Minecraft!