4 ms·
To make it fraud requires two things. First they need to be breaking some kind of legal agreement, secondly they need to use deception to make it seem like they
by contravariant 10y ago
To make it fraud requires two things. First they need to be breaking some kind of legal agreement, secondly they need to use deception to make it seem like they didn't.
In this case it's debatable to what extent they're deceiving anyone, but more importantly all they're doing is pressing the slot button at the optimal time, which is kind of the point of the game. Now most people wouldn't consider this 'fair', but for a legal argument that is a bit vague, even if it might be enough to say, disqualify someone from a tournament.
- Bartweiss 10y ago"including, but not limited to, varying the pull of the handle of a slot machine" Under Nevada gaming law it's not vague - the law might be invalid, but varying slot timing is explicitly banned.
- mokus 10y agoThat's given as an example of "in a manner contrary to the designed and normal operational purpose" - to me, it sounds more like a mechanical slot machine being manipulated by pulling it in such a way that the mechanism doesn't engage in the usual way, perhaps only releasing one of the wheels after you've gotten two to line up well by chance. Pulling the lever at a time you know to be right still sounds like using it for its normal operational purpose to me. Slot machines are designed to have their levers pulled, even when they will pay out as a consequence.
- EdHominem 10y agoThey offer a system that you can time because they know most people have superstitions that don't work, and they shouldn't be allowed to discriminate when someone finds a method that does work. If they don't want a time-able system they should remove the feature that lets you stop the wheels. Of course they never will because selective enforcement is profitable so we should remove their legal protection and make them treat everyone equally.