1) The big poker sites spend millions upon millions of dollars building up their brand names. New sites without a good brand get almost no traffic. Thus, a good name is the most valuable asset a poker site has.
2) The owner of biggest online poker site (PartyPoker.com) is traded on the UK stock exchange; it's hardly a fly-by-night operation. While no poker sites are based in the US (it's illegal) that doesn't mean there's nobody that can go after them if they try to take off with the money.
One of the big problems these sites have is with money laundering. Two people sign up and one will intentionally lose to the other in order to ship their illegally obtained funds or job payment through a legitimate 3rd party.
They do seem to watch for that; on another board I've heard from several people who had their accounts temporarily frozen on suspicion of money laundering.
Anyway, turns out the site's random number generator wasn't as random as it ought to be. They wrote a program to take advantage of that, and could see not only everybodies hands, but all the cards that would follow.
Yup...this was a few years back. They seeded the RNG with the system time, so between your cards and the flop you could figure out what everybody else's cards were. Haven't heard of anything in the past 3-4 years though.
However, as you point out, while you can make steady money playing ring games (if you're good), you can't make BIG money unless you play tourneys. (Both Pokerstars and Party Poker run weekly tournaments with first prizes in the tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars. (Top prize in the most recent Pokerstars tournament was $127k.)
And let's not forget the big ones...while they're way out of my price/skill range, the monthly partypoker million dollar guaranteed has a *minimum* first prize of $210k..
I play the tournaments 'cause I suck at the ring games:-)
I also like that I can join a SnG, play for 45 minutes without risking more than my buyin (these days I usually play the $22 tournaments), and have a fair chance of making a little money.
While I haven't seen anyone accused of cheating in online poker, the fact that it would be pretty easy for someone to be on the phone with someone else at the table, plus the fact that no technology is perfect and someone could theoretically see other players' cards or cheat in some way makes betting money online seem to me to not be a smart thing to do
Quite a few people have tried, but remember: the casinos can look at all the cards to check for suspicious betting patterns, and they have a strong interest in making sure everyone knows they run an honest game. Plus, with the money they're bringing in, they can afford to hire a lot of security people:-)
Of course....when I started, I took advantage of bonuses to play for real money without actually using my own money. Real profit, without real risk:-)
I don't think it would even have to be 2+ players in collusion. I've heard there are some good programs out there that analyze the play, and spit out bet amounts and plays based on the odds...which should give a player using such a decided advantage.
Eh...lotsa psychology in poker. The "correct" bet amount against one player may be incorrect against another. It also changes based on the number of players in the hand, relative positions, etc.
Here's what's wrong with textbooks: they peddle an oversimplified, predigested, emasculated version of whatever they're trying to teach. You say the solution is better teachers? Good teachers hate textbooks. Good teachers know that the job is to teach student to do actual thinking -- a process not assisted by the unchallenging, anti-thought-provoking crap standard textbooks contain.
True, a lot of textbooks aren't worth the cost, but that doesn't mean no textbooks are useful; a good teacher will take advantage of whatever useful resources are available.
When I was teaching (I used to teach 6th grade math and science) I didn't teach out of the book; I lectured on the subject, asked a lot of questions, and did my best to keep everyone involved in the lesson. I also, of course, assigned problems out of the math book (MUCH simpler than photocopying a ton of worksheets for every lesson) and reading out of science books (we had one for each subject, and one of the big things we were working on improving was reading for comprehension; at that level they understood reading a story, but not reading to find information) I also used field trips, quiz shows, etc...anything that helped.
It's true that you can't just pass out textbooks, tell the kids to start reading, and expect them to do well. But that doesn't mean they aren't useful in the classroom.
I would love to teach professionally, but I can't afford the huge pay cut and I will never take a job that requires me to join a union.
The pay cut point is valid, but don't assume you would have to join a union; you might (I don't know where you are) but I taught for a year and didn't. I was never even asked.
Supply optional training, paid for by the district.
Then pay attention to who's taking advantage of it.
I took an education class this past year; it was paid for by the teacher's union (to which I don't belong) and I got some useful information out of it.
Only trouble was I had to actually get out of the building on time to get to class:-)
But, with the responsibilities of an adult, can you now AFFORD to go to school?
I went through 6 years of college right after high school, and now I'd like to go back and take a degree in another subject...but it's hard to find the time and the money.
Did he say "only" or "always"? I heard it as "always two there are"...that doesn't seem to preclude more, just that there's at least 2 (which doesn't really make sense....what happens if the master does before the apprentice is trained?)
Disclaimer: I haven't RTFA, but I previously did some work in quantum cryptography.
The reason that quantum cryptography is "hack-proof" is that it's based on one-time pads; it just uses quantum physics to avoid the key distribution problem. The security of one-time pads, of course, depends on them being used only one time; there has to be a separate random bit used to scramble every bit of the video. Thus, the "100 keys per second" basically just means that each key is long enough to completely encrypt one frame of the video, and they generate a new key (in essance, a new one-time pad) for each frame.
Slashdot Mirror
You know the ironic part?
:-p
It'll only scare off the dumb players...and the dumb players are exactly who we need more of
Poker is great, but poker with live humans, cigar smoke and liquor is WAY WAY better.
:-p
Actually, one of the main reasons I play poker online is to AVOID the smoke
At least there's never any confusion over what google's inventions are going to be called.
Curious to see exactly what they have in mind..
*grin*
:-)
Made $800 playing blackjack at that site, without risking any of my own money...but suit yourself
Just a few points you might find interesting..
1) The big poker sites spend millions upon millions of dollars building up their brand names. New sites without a good brand get almost no traffic. Thus, a good name is the most valuable asset a poker site has.
2) The owner of biggest online poker site (PartyPoker.com) is traded on the UK stock exchange; it's hardly a fly-by-night operation. While no poker sites are based in the US (it's illegal) that doesn't mean there's nobody that can go after them if they try to take off with the money.
Actually you could deal 4 royal flushes with a single deck.
:-)
Not in Texas Hold'em
Wonder how'd you do against a multitabler playing those same 8 games...
One of the big problems these sites have is with money laundering. Two people sign up and one will intentionally lose to the other in order to ship their illegally obtained funds or job payment through a legitimate 3rd party.
They do seem to watch for that; on another board I've heard from several people who had their accounts temporarily frozen on suspicion of money laundering.
Anyway, turns out the site's random number generator wasn't as random as it ought to be. They wrote a program to take advantage of that, and could see not only everybodies hands, but all the cards that would follow.
Yup...this was a few years back. They seeded the RNG with the system time, so between your cards and the flop you could figure out what everybody else's cards were. Haven't heard of anything in the past 3-4 years though.
However, as you point out, while you can make steady money playing ring games (if you're good), you can't make BIG money unless you play tourneys. (Both Pokerstars and Party Poker run weekly tournaments with first prizes in the tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars. (Top prize in the most recent Pokerstars tournament was $127k.)
And let's not forget the big ones...while they're way out of my price/skill range, the monthly partypoker million dollar guaranteed has a *minimum* first prize of $210k..
I play the tournaments 'cause I suck at the ring games :-)
I also like that I can join a SnG, play for 45 minutes without risking more than my buyin (these days I usually play the $22 tournaments), and have a fair chance of making a little money.
While I haven't seen anyone accused of cheating in online poker, the fact that it would be pretty easy for someone to be on the phone with someone else at the table, plus the fact that no technology is perfect and someone could theoretically see other players' cards or cheat in some way makes betting money online seem to me to not be a smart thing to do
:-)
:-)
Quite a few people have tried, but remember: the casinos can look at all the cards to check for suspicious betting patterns, and they have a strong interest in making sure everyone knows they run an honest game. Plus, with the money they're bringing in, they can afford to hire a lot of security people
Of course....when I started, I took advantage of bonuses to play for real money without actually using my own money. Real profit, without real risk
I don't think it would even have to be 2+ players in collusion. I've heard there are some good programs out there that analyze the play, and spit out bet amounts and plays based on the odds...which should give a player using such a decided advantage.
Eh...lotsa psychology in poker. The "correct" bet amount against one player may be incorrect against another. It also changes based on the number of players in the hand, relative positions, etc.
By hardcore Christians, I mean those who would impose their will on us, rather than turn the other cheek.
By which you mean, those who aren't actually Christian, but prefer to pick and choose which parts of the bible suit them.
Here's what's wrong with textbooks: they peddle an oversimplified, predigested, emasculated version of whatever they're trying to teach. You say the solution is better teachers? Good teachers hate textbooks. Good teachers know that the job is to teach student to do actual thinking -- a process not assisted by the unchallenging, anti-thought-provoking crap standard textbooks contain.
True, a lot of textbooks aren't worth the cost, but that doesn't mean no textbooks are useful; a good teacher will take advantage of whatever useful resources are available.
When I was teaching (I used to teach 6th grade math and science) I didn't teach out of the book; I lectured on the subject, asked a lot of questions, and did my best to keep everyone involved in the lesson. I also, of course, assigned problems out of the math book (MUCH simpler than photocopying a ton of worksheets for every lesson) and reading out of science books (we had one for each subject, and one of the big things we were working on improving was reading for comprehension; at that level they understood reading a story, but not reading to find information) I also used field trips, quiz shows, etc...anything that helped.
It's true that you can't just pass out textbooks, tell the kids to start reading, and expect them to do well. But that doesn't mean they aren't useful in the classroom.
I would love to teach professionally, but I can't afford the huge pay cut and I will never take a job that requires me to join a union.
The pay cut point is valid, but don't assume you would have to join a union; you might (I don't know where you are) but I taught for a year and didn't. I was never even asked.
Supply optional training, paid for by the district.
:-)
Then pay attention to who's taking advantage of it.
I took an education class this past year; it was paid for by the teacher's union (to which I don't belong) and I got some useful information out of it.
Only trouble was I had to actually get out of the building on time to get to class
Sounds about right.
I figure it as a University has people doing research (and grants graduate degrees) while a college doesn't.
But, with the responsibilities of an adult, can you now AFFORD to go to school?
I went through 6 years of college right after high school, and now I'd like to go back and take a degree in another subject...but it's hard to find the time and the money.
Did he say "only" or "always"? I heard it as "always two there are"...that doesn't seem to preclude more, just that there's at least 2 (which doesn't really make sense....what happens if the master does before the apprentice is trained?)
The sad thing is, I know from experience that you're not joking :-p
Only effect of NCLB that I have personal experience with, is some good teachers quitting rather than go back to school for classes they don't need :-p
Disclaimer: I haven't RTFA, but I previously did some work in quantum cryptography.
The reason that quantum cryptography is "hack-proof" is that it's based on one-time pads; it just uses quantum physics to avoid the key distribution problem. The security of one-time pads, of course, depends on them being used only one time; there has to be a separate random bit used to scramble every bit of the video. Thus, the "100 keys per second" basically just means that each key is long enough to completely encrypt one frame of the video, and they generate a new key (in essance, a new one-time pad) for each frame.
1. What's that about? I'm guessing its some sort of boat-based shark repellent. I think it's basically a big cage he swims in that can be electrified.
So how many people clicked the third button?
BTW I had no trouble loading it. (Although I just got "loading...loading" when I clicked the 3rd button, is there anything else there?)