5 ms·

Focusing on a small but important detail that some have already mentioned but with a more aggressive tone... was your "loophole" system tested in an actual liti

by j1elo 5y ago

Focusing on a small but important detail that some have already mentioned but with a more aggressive tone... was your "loophole" system tested in an actual litigation at any point? What I mean is that this: > The IoM server would call the Swiss server every time a hand was dealt might seem like a clever loophole around the laws in IoM, but in reality it sounds to me like the kind of technicalities that wouldn't really pass the reasoning of a human judge, who in their duty of interpreting the law and its intended spirit, would probably consider this an invalid trick and thus that the RNG of the system still resided in IoM, even if technically it didn't. But of course, none of this matters if the casino never had any legal battle to fight where this idea could be tested in court, which is the equivalent of not being "caught".

noduerme 5y ago
It was never legally tested. It was what I felt I had to do such that the randomness didn't take place on the island. And no randomness ever did. I was in touch with a lot of officers of the large casinos operating out of there at the time, who were curious but skeptical about Bitcoin. I think by the time they realized it was a potentially valuable thing, I had already shut down operations, because I wasn't willing to chase the market into legally gray areas.
- carlmr 5y ago
  If you go by technicalities you could have used the argument that you're not generating random numbers, only pseudorandom numbers.
  - nephanth 5y ago
    Hum if you're running a casino, I hope you are using at least a bit of [entropy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_\(computing\) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_\(computing\)) . you wouldn't want your shuffles to be predictable...
mvc 5y ago
He got an MP on his side which seems to be all it takes these days in the UK.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- madaxe_again 5y ago
  You’d be amazed at how cheap it is. You can usually get an MP to do your bidding or say your piece in Parliament for a donation of £10k or less. I’ve never heard of anyone paying more.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - gnfargbl 5y ago
    It would be a contempt of Parliament to either request or agree to such an arrangement [1]. If you have definitive evidence of this having happened in the recent past, you really should pass it on to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. [1] https://erskinemay.parliament.uk/section/5023/corruption-or-impropriety/ https://erskinemay.parliament.uk/section/5023/corruption-or-...
    - madaxe_again 5y ago
      This is why it’s a donation to the party - not to them or their office - although they can want a campaign contribution, which again doesn’t count as going to them. I’ve had an MP literally solicit this from me - he emailed a bunch of local businesses basically stating his price list. He’s no longer an MP, or in politics - but you see this stuff everywhere, all the time. Any member’s bill you see has almost certainly been sponsored.
  - Grustaf 5y ago
    Does that include the lobbyist's cut, or would you go directly to the MP? But how much do you really gain from buying a single MP?
seanalltogether 5y ago
Yeah, that's like setting up a casino in one location with a permanent phone line open to switzerland to ask where the ball landed on the roulette wheels. Doesn't seem like it would hold up under scrutiny.
- noduerme 5y ago
  That's exactly what it was... and it really depends on how a locale defines gambling. In Costa Rica, for instance, you can run the game of chance as long as the money isn't landed onshore, because you're just generating random numbers. IoM was slightly different in that they didn't mind you landing cash, they just wouldn't allow you to generate the numbers. So it seemed natural to co-locate, and then Switzerland was a better backstop than either.
  - j1elo 5y ago
    In any case I must admit that the trick, while we agree wouldn't (probably) hold water in court, it might have actually helped (we'll never know) to keep that casino out of some law enforcement watch list... especially if the officers were too overburdened with more important issues / lazy enough / not looking into that kind of activities at the time.
amelius 5y ago
> in reality it sounds to me like the kind of technicalities that wouldn't really pass the reasoning of a human judge Yes, only big companies can successfully "hack" the law based on its letter, see e.g. tax evasion.

by j1elo 5y ago

noduerme 5y ago

It was never legally tested. It was what I felt I had to do such that the randomness didn't take place on the island. And no randomness ever did. I was in touch with a lot of officers of the large casinos operating out of there at the time, who were curious but skeptical about Bitcoin. I think by the time they realized it was a potentially valuable thing, I had already shut down operations, because I wasn't willing to chase the market into legally gray areas.

carlmr 5y ago
If you go by technicalities you could have used the argument that you're not generating random numbers, only pseudorandom numbers.
- nephanth 5y ago
  Hum if you're running a casino, I hope you are using at least a bit of [entropy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_\(computing\) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_\(computing\)) . you wouldn't want your shuffles to be predictable...

mvc 5y ago

He got an MP on his side which seems to be all it takes these days in the UK.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
madaxe_again 5y ago
You’d be amazed at how cheap it is. You can usually get an MP to do your bidding or say your piece in Parliament for a donation of £10k or less. I’ve never heard of anyone paying more.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- gnfargbl 5y ago
  It would be a contempt of Parliament to either request or agree to such an arrangement [1]. If you have definitive evidence of this having happened in the recent past, you really should pass it on to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. [1] https://erskinemay.parliament.uk/section/5023/corruption-or-impropriety/ https://erskinemay.parliament.uk/section/5023/corruption-or-...
  - madaxe_again 5y ago
    This is why it’s a donation to the party - not to them or their office - although they can want a campaign contribution, which again doesn’t count as going to them. I’ve had an MP literally solicit this from me - he emailed a bunch of local businesses basically stating his price list. He’s no longer an MP, or in politics - but you see this stuff everywhere, all the time. Any member’s bill you see has almost certainly been sponsored.
- Grustaf 5y ago
  Does that include the lobbyist's cut, or would you go directly to the MP? But how much do you really gain from buying a single MP?

seanalltogether 5y ago

Yeah, that's like setting up a casino in one location with a permanent phone line open to switzerland to ask where the ball landed on the roulette wheels. Doesn't seem like it would hold up under scrutiny.

noduerme 5y ago
That's exactly what it was... and it really depends on how a locale defines gambling. In Costa Rica, for instance, you can run the game of chance as long as the money isn't landed onshore, because you're just generating random numbers. IoM was slightly different in that they didn't mind you landing cash, they just wouldn't allow you to generate the numbers. So it seemed natural to co-locate, and then Switzerland was a better backstop than either.
- j1elo 5y ago
  In any case I must admit that the trick, while we agree wouldn't (probably) hold water in court, it might have actually helped (we'll never know) to keep that casino out of some law enforcement watch list... especially if the officers were too overburdened with more important issues / lazy enough / not looking into that kind of activities at the time.

amelius 5y ago

> in reality it sounds to me like the kind of technicalities that wouldn't really pass the reasoning of a human judge Yes, only big companies can successfully "hack" the law based on its letter, see e.g. tax evasion.