While another employee may be similarly vulnerable, ideally they will do some validation testing, and possibly rearrange their system to require two people to concur that someone should be watching the eye in the sky.
Let's say that, for example, it has two tables playing, one with six people and one with three.
... but that doesn't matter. The house takes a rake out of every pot. 20-30 pots an hour is $80-$200 per table per hour. (This depends on the rake.)
The most common complaints I hear from poker players are that the waitresses hardly ever come around - this leads me to believe that they don't have dedicated waitstaff. They're shared with everywhere else.
If there aren't enough players to warrant a game, they close that table and send the dealer off to deal blackjack.
As for $10/hour to pay the dealer, that depends on the house, of course - but most of the job postings for dealers I've seen are in the $5-$10 range, and they're considered tipped employees. The dealers make most of their money from tips, which usually come from the winner of each pot.
Poker rooms can (and do) make money for the house, since they take what would otherwise be an inconvenient storage room, pretty up the carpet and lights a little, and turn it from a "making no money" space into a "making a little money" space - plus the fact that many poker players will go and spend time playing blackjack until their seat is ready at a poker table.
... those aren't in privately hired rooms. Those are in a common poker area. Every poker room I've seen is not on the main floor - it is a separate area, off to the side.
The casinos make want people to play slots or roulette; those are the main areas.
$100 isn't a lot of cash, but that's profit - after keeping the lights on, buying a new deck of cards, paying the dealer, and getting the table re-felted every few months.
I stand by my statement that the general poker rooms are not in the prime areas - they're usually in the back, or off to the side. They're just not in the prime locations like roulette, keno, blackjack, or slots, because they don't pull in the same kind of money.
The obvious system (to me) is an ad delivery system where you can buy yourself out of seeing ads.
Site hosts sign on with the system and get money; the money either comes from subscribers who are paying to not see ads, or from advertisers, who are paying to have their ads delivered along with the web page.
The Reg article and the summary are incorrect. There is no evidence that this was a poker game.
Good catch. That table in the picture in the Herald Sun article looks a like a baccarat, or possibly a blackjack table.
In fact, since the Crown casino talks about hoping to recover the money, and not recover it for the players, it might not be. However, I'm not sure what game is played against the house where players' cards are concealed. Maybe they mean looking at the dealer's down card in blackjack?
Some variants of blackjack are dealt face-down, with only the dealer's up card showing.
the rake can be $10-$15 per player per hour. Considering a skilled dealer is required and quite a bit of floor space, that is not a huge winning proposition for the casino.
Let me get this right - they're making money, while risking none of their own, and their dealers and cocktail servers are making tips?
A house edge on a game where the house can't possibly lose? I think it's time for me to open a poker room.
Floor space isn't expensive (relatively) - the poker room can be in a secluded area, rather than the high-traffic, high-visibility main floor - and that's probably how the poker players want it, too.
Looks to me like about $100/table/hour profit on a relatively minor initial investment.
"The count" doesn't significantly change how you('re supposed) to play, it changes how you('re supposed to) bet.
Every table assumes you're counting cards. They know when you're "counting cards" (or using some other means of skilled play) successfully when you're making high-risk plays at a higher wager than your typical play with a higher-than-probability-expected rate of success. You're certainly allowed to make stupid plays, but they tend to scrutinize your play if your stupid plays work out in your favor more often than not.
"High risk plays" here means doubling on greater than 12, splitting tens or fives, hitting against a "break card", standing on less than 12, etc.
The sun's power output is relatively constant*, but the available power for collection for a given point on the planet changes based on angle of incidence, distance to the source, celestial body occlusion, and atmospheric interference.
*Yes, I understand that it varies, but it's not on a dimmer-switch timed from dawn to dusk.
HUMANS ARE ENDOWED WITH RECORDING DEVICES, MORONS.
My understanding is that it's still quite challenging getting an accurate detailed playback out of someone else's brain. This is the platform's saving grace.
You're absolutely right on the layers & plated through holes. Anything you can run in-house is extremely likely to be single or double layer, with no plated through holes. That doesn't mean they're not useful, but it is darn hard to use a high pin count surface mount chip with them.
Etching your own board might be useful if none of your devices are more than about 28 pins. I guess I was thinking that if you're doing anything more complicated than that, there's enough board design to warrant a commercially fabricated board.
(I'm still old-school enough to occasionally make my own 1 or 2 layer non-PTH boards in the basement from time to time, for use with through-hole parts. Why yes, I do have vacuum tubes on hand, as well as a few of those new-fangled solid state transfer resistors...)
Instinct tells me that CAM-daubing solder paste is only barely efficient for a one-off. At about a quantity of 4 pieces, it should be far easier to cut a stencil, align it with the bare board, and squeegee solder paste onto it.
If the $2000 device can make the stencils, now you're onto something.
There is a slight advantage to making the bare boards yourself - time. You're not waiting days or weeks for the board shop to turn your job, you can load up a blank board and have an assembled prototype tomorrow (without the rush fees that are cost-prohibitive for hobbyists). If you're doing more than a small handful of boards, it's almost certainly less expensive to get a boardhouse to produce the bare boards, at the tradeoff of lead time.
I expect that it's more efficient to "etch" the traces with a CNC mill for a one-off prototype, allowing makering without forcing people "into the soup". (...or you can just print the photoresist stencils on laser transparency media, and do a photoresist/chemical etch process, or you can do a toner-transfer resist...)
The actuation point on a Model M is not at the bottom of the key travel.
This means that there isn't (necessarily) that abrupt impact at the bottom of the keystroke that tends to hurt the fingers. A little bit of operator skill means that you don't have to hammer the keys.
The audible feedback isn't useful to me directly - I can feel that the key has actuated.
The audible feedback is useful to me indirectly, however, as people notice that I'm typing enthusiastically, so they tend not to disturb me when I'm in a moment of flow.
The article mentions a 100 year time frame to collision, and suggests that we're basically already screwed at the 2 year mark. The size of gravity tug we can build, launch, and get to an intercept point by T-2years isn't going to help, either. If we don't detect it until T-2Y, yes... it's just as you said, and I expect that the governments will be more focused on keeping us in uninformed to preclude societal collapse.
You want to get it early – when do we start concerning ourselves with a budget to handle it? If it’s going to come in 100 years, what do you say? Ah, let our descendants worry about that in their Congress. You know, 88 percent of Congress faces reelection every two years... And so that's not a long enough time scale to match the time scales that matter for our survival.
Slashdot Mirror
You're overgeneralizing considerably.
While another employee may be similarly vulnerable, ideally they will do some validation testing, and possibly rearrange their system to require two people to concur that someone should be watching the eye in the sky.
Let's say that, for example, it has two tables playing, one with six people and one with three.
... but that doesn't matter. The house takes a rake out of every pot. 20-30 pots an hour is $80-$200 per table per hour. (This depends on the rake.)
The most common complaints I hear from poker players are that the waitresses hardly ever come around - this leads me to believe that they don't have dedicated waitstaff. They're shared with everywhere else.
If there aren't enough players to warrant a game, they close that table and send the dealer off to deal blackjack.
As for $10/hour to pay the dealer, that depends on the house, of course - but most of the job postings for dealers I've seen are in the $5-$10 range, and they're considered tipped employees. The dealers make most of their money from tips, which usually come from the winner of each pot.
Poker rooms can (and do) make money for the house, since they take what would otherwise be an inconvenient storage room, pretty up the carpet and lights a little, and turn it from a "making no money" space into a "making a little money" space - plus the fact that many poker players will go and spend time playing blackjack until their seat is ready at a poker table.
I've been to several casinos.
You said:
The casinos make want people to play slots or roulette; those are the main areas.
$100 isn't a lot of cash, but that's profit - after keeping the lights on, buying a new deck of cards, paying the dealer, and getting the table re-felted every few months.
I stand by my statement that the general poker rooms are not in the prime areas - they're usually in the back, or off to the side. They're just not in the prime locations like roulette, keno, blackjack, or slots, because they don't pull in the same kind of money.
The obvious system (to me) is an ad delivery system where you can buy yourself out of seeing ads.
Site hosts sign on with the system and get money; the money either comes from subscribers who are paying to not see ads, or from advertisers, who are paying to have their ads delivered along with the web page.
Replacing an employee that allows unintended access is less costly than replacing an electronic system that readily allows unintended access.
The Reg article and the summary are incorrect. There is no evidence that this was a poker game.
Good catch. That table in the picture in the Herald Sun article looks a like a baccarat, or possibly a blackjack table.
In fact, since the Crown casino talks about hoping to recover the money, and not recover it for the players, it might not be. However, I'm not sure what game is played against the house where players' cards are concealed. Maybe they mean looking at the dealer's down card in blackjack?
Some variants of blackjack are dealt face-down, with only the dealer's up card showing.
the rake can be $10-$15 per player per hour. Considering a skilled dealer is required and quite a bit of floor space, that is not a huge winning proposition for the casino.
Let me get this right - they're making money, while risking none of their own, and their dealers and cocktail servers are making tips?
A house edge on a game where the house can't possibly lose? I think it's time for me to open a poker room.
Floor space isn't expensive (relatively) - the poker room can be in a secluded area, rather than the high-traffic, high-visibility main floor - and that's probably how the poker players want it, too.
Looks to me like about $100/table/hour profit on a relatively minor initial investment.
Look up "blackjack basic strategy".
"The count" doesn't significantly change how you('re supposed) to play, it changes how you('re supposed to) bet.
Every table assumes you're counting cards. They know when you're "counting cards" (or using some other means of skilled play) successfully when you're making high-risk plays at a higher wager than your typical play with a higher-than-probability-expected rate of success. You're certainly allowed to make stupid plays, but they tend to scrutinize your play if your stupid plays work out in your favor more often than not.
"High risk plays" here means doubling on greater than 12, splitting tens or fives, hitting against a "break card", standing on less than 12, etc.
Obligatory obnoxious semantic argument:
The sun's power output is relatively constant*, but the available power for collection for a given point on the planet changes based on angle of incidence, distance to the source, celestial body occlusion, and atmospheric interference.
*Yes, I understand that it varies, but it's not on a dimmer-switch timed from dawn to dusk.
What an interesting reason for police to prefer not having cameras pointed at them.
HUMANS ARE ENDOWED WITH RECORDING DEVICES, MORONS.
My understanding is that it's still quite challenging getting an accurate detailed playback out of someone else's brain. This is the platform's saving grace.
Look at my laser printer! It's like a 3D printer but it prints on paper using toner instead of depositing plastic in layers!
Just one layer on substrate is the limit with most of them; there are registration issues when you try to do multi-pass.
Toner IS plastic, isn't it?
You're absolutely right on the layers & plated through holes. Anything you can run in-house is extremely likely to be single or double layer, with no plated through holes. That doesn't mean they're not useful, but it is darn hard to use a high pin count surface mount chip with them.
Etching your own board might be useful if none of your devices are more than about 28 pins. I guess I was thinking that if you're doing anything more complicated than that, there's enough board design to warrant a commercially fabricated board.
(I'm still old-school enough to occasionally make my own 1 or 2 layer non-PTH boards in the basement from time to time, for use with through-hole parts. Why yes, I do have vacuum tubes on hand, as well as a few of those new-fangled solid state transfer resistors...)
Instinct tells me that CAM-daubing solder paste is only barely efficient for a one-off. At about a quantity of 4 pieces, it should be far easier to cut a stencil, align it with the bare board, and squeegee solder paste onto it.
If the $2000 device can make the stencils, now you're onto something.
There is a slight advantage to making the bare boards yourself - time. You're not waiting days or weeks for the board shop to turn your job, you can load up a blank board and have an assembled prototype tomorrow (without the rush fees that are cost-prohibitive for hobbyists). If you're doing more than a small handful of boards, it's almost certainly less expensive to get a boardhouse to produce the bare boards, at the tradeoff of lead time.
I expect that it's more efficient to "etch" the traces with a CNC mill for a one-off prototype, allowing makering without forcing people "into the soup". (...or you can just print the photoresist stencils on laser transparency media, and do a photoresist/chemical etch process, or you can do a toner-transfer resist...)
The actuation point on a Model M is not at the bottom of the key travel.
This means that there isn't (necessarily) that abrupt impact at the bottom of the keystroke that tends to hurt the fingers. A little bit of operator skill means that you don't have to hammer the keys.
The audible feedback isn't useful to me directly - I can feel that the key has actuated.
The audible feedback is useful to me indirectly, however, as people notice that I'm typing enthusiastically, so they tend not to disturb me when I'm in a moment of flow.
You get to choose if "C" is for "Common" or something else.
I brought my Model M to the office. I no longer hear the complaints of my cubicle comrades over its glorious actuation sounds.
(51G8572, 5/19/95 - and about a 3 meter detachable cable on it)
They have jet airliners.
Putting a bomb in a Tu-134 with a sacrificial pilot is an extreme, but credible delivery system.
They probably can't hit California, but they probably can hit South Korea or Japan - either of which would somewhat obligate a US response.
According to the many image-macros circulating, one cannot unsea.
The article mentions a 100 year time frame to collision, and suggests that we're basically already screwed at the 2 year mark. The size of gravity tug we can build, launch, and get to an intercept point by T-2years isn't going to help, either. If we don't detect it until T-2Y, yes... it's just as you said, and I expect that the governments will be more focused on keeping us in uninformed to preclude societal collapse.
You want to get it early – when do we start concerning ourselves with a budget to handle it? If it’s going to come in 100 years, what do you say? Ah, let our descendants worry about that in their Congress. You know, 88 percent of Congress faces reelection every two years... And so that's not a long enough time scale to match the time scales that matter for our survival.
So nice to know that we're now catching up to science fiction from 40 years ago.
the bar for intelligence of the Slashdot editors is pretty low.
It's an ADA compliance thing.
Apparently, they forgot to hold this one for release the extra 29 days...