4 ms·

This comment is completely unhelpful.

by dtby 15y ago

raganwald 15y ago
Did you mean to imply that another comment is completely unhelpful, or was it your intention to invoke the Epimenides paradox by writing a comment that claims itself to be unhelpful? https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Epimenides_paradox https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Epimenides_pa...
- dtby 15y ago
  How clever. The intent was more than apparent.
  - raganwald 15y ago
    Perhaps I've been reading too much Raymond Smullyan, I apologize if it came across as a criticism of your comment. In fact, I thought the ambiguity was clever on your part.
    - dtby 15y ago
      No worries. I thought the Planet without Laughter was particularly entertaining. It's also amusing in its own way to watch my comments get voted down. I have, undoubtedly played more +EV games versus a casino than anyone on this site. (And, yes, I will bet on that, too!) But some sort of egalitarian sense of correctness has driven the "value" of my comments below yours. I cared enough to make a 2nd (and now third) comment about it, but really, I don't care. So that kinda sucks.
      - deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
      - mitjak 15y ago
        Laughter? Was this supposed to be a joke?
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- scoot 15y ago
  Or perhaps closer to the Liar paradox? "This sentence is false": https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Liar_paradox https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Liar_paradox All completely OT of course!
dtby 15y ago
Hey, neat. Yet another comment where I am a demonstrable expert and I get voted to Hell like a moron. Feel free to get this one to -44, except that you can't tell any more where it lives. Best to down vote if you're unsure.
- sorbus 15y ago
  Your original comment is being downvoted because it doesn't explain why the comment it says to be unhelpful is (or at least that's my best guess; I obviously don't know the intent of every downvoter). HN tends to frown on comments which add nothing to the discussion. Also, if you're a "demonstrable expert" then you should be able to actually explain why the original one was unhelpful rather than just asserting that as fact and expecting everyone to believe you.
  - mquander 15y ago
    "Actually explain?" Come on, read it. It says "casinos make money, but if you count cards, you make money." It's a worthless statement and it has nothing to do with the comment it replies to. I downvoted dtby's comment because the reasonable way to deal with worthless comments is to downvote them, not post a followup saying "This comment is completely unhelpful."
    - sethg 15y ago
      Let me elaborate on my previous comment, then: In the absence of security countermeasures on the casino end, counting cards is not very difficult. You need to be able to do some mental arithmetic in a distraction-filled environment, and you need the self-discipline to follow the technique even when your guts are telling you otherwise, but lots of people have those character traits. So if a casino does not take active measures to distinguish the blackjack players who are counting cards (who need to be kicked out) from the blackjack players who are just lucky (who need to be courted until their luck runs out), then lots of people, not just the generic “you”, will show up and gradually bleed the house dry.
      - 15y ago
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

This comment is completely unhelpful.

by dtby 15y ago

This comment is completely unhelpful.

Did you mean to imply that another comment is completely unhelpful, or was it your intention to invoke the Epimenides paradox by writing a comment that claims itself to be unhelpful? https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Epimenides_paradox https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Epimenides_pa...

dtby 15y ago
How clever. The intent was more than apparent.
- raganwald 15y ago
  Perhaps I've been reading too much Raymond Smullyan, I apologize if it came across as a criticism of your comment. In fact, I thought the ambiguity was clever on your part.
  - dtby 15y ago
    No worries. I thought the Planet without Laughter was particularly entertaining. It's also amusing in its own way to watch my comments get voted down. I have, undoubtedly played more +EV games versus a casino than anyone on this site. (And, yes, I will bet on that, too!) But some sort of egalitarian sense of correctness has driven the "value" of my comments below yours. I cared enough to make a 2nd (and now third) comment about it, but really, I don't care. So that kinda sucks.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    - mitjak 15y ago
      Laughter? Was this supposed to be a joke?
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
scoot 15y ago
Or perhaps closer to the Liar paradox? "This sentence is false": https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Liar_paradox https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Liar_paradox All completely OT of course!

dtby 15y ago

Hey, neat. Yet another comment where I am a demonstrable expert and I get voted to Hell like a moron. Feel free to get this one to -44, except that you can't tell any more where it lives. Best to down vote if you're unsure.

sorbus 15y ago
Your original comment is being downvoted because it doesn't explain why the comment it says to be unhelpful is (or at least that's my best guess; I obviously don't know the intent of every downvoter). HN tends to frown on comments which add nothing to the discussion. Also, if you're a "demonstrable expert" then you should be able to actually explain why the original one was unhelpful rather than just asserting that as fact and expecting everyone to believe you.
- mquander 15y ago
  "Actually explain?" Come on, read it. It says "casinos make money, but if you count cards, you make money." It's a worthless statement and it has nothing to do with the comment it replies to. I downvoted dtby's comment because the reasonable way to deal with worthless comments is to downvote them, not post a followup saying "This comment is completely unhelpful."
  - sethg 15y ago
    Let me elaborate on my previous comment, then: In the absence of security countermeasures on the casino end, counting cards is not very difficult. You need to be able to do some mental arithmetic in a distraction-filled environment, and you need the self-discipline to follow the technique even when your guts are telling you otherwise, but lots of people have those character traits. So if a casino does not take active measures to distinguish the blackjack players who are counting cards (who need to be kicked out) from the blackjack players who are just lucky (who need to be courted until their luck runs out), then lots of people, not just the generic “you”, will show up and gradually bleed the house dry.
    - 15y ago

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]