4 ms·

Tangent: I briefly worked in the "gaming" (gambling) industry. To cope with the proliferation of laws, the backing algorithms could be changed to match whatever

Tangent: I briefly worked in the "gaming" (gambling) industry. To cope with the proliferation of laws, the backing algorithms could be changed to match whatever games of chance which were legal in a given jurisdiction, then topologically transformed to look like the desired game. What looked like video poker might actually be bingo, hence legal in a "only bingo is legal" locale. (ETA: Sorry, no how-to details. I didn't work on that part of the code.)

mikeash 13y ago
That's pretty wacky. Could you explain a bit more about how the transformation works? I can't quite see how you run bingo behind the scenes but display something that looks like poker. They seem too different.
- ctdonath 13y ago
  See adjacent reply.
  - mikeash 13y ago
    Thanks much for the reply and for letting me know about it! Fun stuff.
- PeterisP 13y ago
  The general concept is that the game isn't skill-based anyway; you have a randomly generated X that will have a payout of Y. If you have generated a bingo card + a ball sequence that will lose, then you can map that as a video poker hand that will lose and display that to the customer; if you have generated a bingo card+ball seqence that will win a multiple of 10, then you show that to the customer as a video poker hand that has, say, a full house combination and write in the 'rules' that having a full house hand will pay out a multiple of 10. Sure, it's not proper poker; but it's poker-themed enough to be attractive and such games are manufactured. You just construct an artificial mapping between losing and winning positions in both games, the rest is cosmetics. You can have an "opponent hand" that is revealed afterwards or deal out "your hand" to you as in hold-em poker - it doesn't mean that the cards need to be "dealt" fairly; they are just illustration for a pregenerated loss/win/bigwin decision.
khafra 13y ago
The most bizarre part, to me, is that the law actually cared about the real probability distribution over winning conditions, instead of the surface appearance. That seems way too sensible for lawyers to have come up with.
- ctdonath 13y ago
  Law is often written by people who don't understand something well enough to regulate it sensibly, they just draw some lines in ignorance and then are surprised when the knowing find creative ways around it. "No gambling here. Bingo only, because little old ladies will vote against us in droves if we ban it too." "Ok, can we do a video bingo game?" "Sure. It's bingo." "Can we line up five bingo cards at once?" "Sure. It's bingo." "Can we add up corresponding cells and display those?" "Uh...sure. It's bingo...ish." "Can we display just the first line of that summation grid?" "Yea....ah. It's still...uh...bingo." "Numbers are just arbitrary-shape symbols; can we display whatever icons we want in place of those numbers?" "Uh...yeah...kinda odd, but don't see why not." "OK, here's our game. Take a look." "Hey! That's poker! That's illegal!" "No, it's bingo. It just looks like poker after every step YOU approved."

mikeash 13y ago

That's pretty wacky. Could you explain a bit more about how the transformation works? I can't quite see how you run bingo behind the scenes but display something that looks like poker. They seem too different.

ctdonath 13y ago
See adjacent reply.
- mikeash 13y ago
  Thanks much for the reply and for letting me know about it! Fun stuff.
PeterisP 13y ago
The general concept is that the game isn't skill-based anyway; you have a randomly generated X that will have a payout of Y. If you have generated a bingo card + a ball sequence that will lose, then you can map that as a video poker hand that will lose and display that to the customer; if you have generated a bingo card+ball seqence that will win a multiple of 10, then you show that to the customer as a video poker hand that has, say, a full house combination and write in the 'rules' that having a full house hand will pay out a multiple of 10. Sure, it's not proper poker; but it's poker-themed enough to be attractive and such games are manufactured. You just construct an artificial mapping between losing and winning positions in both games, the rest is cosmetics. You can have an "opponent hand" that is revealed afterwards or deal out "your hand" to you as in hold-em poker - it doesn't mean that the cards need to be "dealt" fairly; they are just illustration for a pregenerated loss/win/bigwin decision.

khafra 13y ago

The most bizarre part, to me, is that the law actually cared about the real probability distribution over winning conditions, instead of the surface appearance. That seems way too sensible for lawyers to have come up with.

ctdonath 13y ago
Law is often written by people who don't understand something well enough to regulate it sensibly, they just draw some lines in ignorance and then are surprised when the knowing find creative ways around it. "No gambling here. Bingo only, because little old ladies will vote against us in droves if we ban it too." "Ok, can we do a video bingo game?" "Sure. It's bingo." "Can we line up five bingo cards at once?" "Sure. It's bingo." "Can we add up corresponding cells and display those?" "Uh...sure. It's bingo...ish." "Can we display just the first line of that summation grid?" "Yea....ah. It's still...uh...bingo." "Numbers are just arbitrary-shape symbols; can we display whatever icons we want in place of those numbers?" "Uh...yeah...kinda odd, but don't see why not." "OK, here's our game. Take a look." "Hey! That's poker! That's illegal!" "No, it's bingo. It just looks like poker after every step YOU approved."