Muy Bet casino how to b the great wall slot play

dcollins writes "The previous discussion here has been about who is responsible for faulty software. Yahoo has a new option: users will probably be held criminally liable for using the software. From the Associated Press: Prosecutors are considering criminal charges against casino gamblers who won big on slot machines with faulty software installed. Harrison County Chief Deputy Prosecutor John Collins said a decision on whether to pursue criminal charges will be made within the next two to three weeks. When knowingly playing a faulty machine, 'criminal intent' may be involved, he said. Can the average user distinguish between 'faulty software' and 'lucky?'"

Related Links

Our ATMs are broken, let's go to jail

This discussion is archived. New comments cannot be posted.

Bad Software Slot Machines Send Players to Jail More Login

Bad Software Slot Machines Send Players to Jail

The Fine Print

The following comments are attributable to the poster. We do not assume any responsibility.

Oh dear (score: 4, insightful)

Why don't you stop turning a balanced article into an overly sensationalized summary? We're not in the 1920s anymore. No need to stretch super-simple telegram messages or make up details while waiting for a postmarked letter :-/.

Can the average user tell the difference between "faulty software" and "lucky"?

If you put $1 into a machine and get $10 in credits, you know there's more going on than just "lucky".

Yahoo has a new option: hold users who used the software criminally liable.

As TFA says, the casino contacted the winners about the error, and some of them agreed to return their winnings (the casino's total losses were close to $500, 000). Criminal charges are being considered for the remaining 20-odd people who abused the machines. These charges would require a gambler to be brought before a judge and have to prove that he felt "lucky" when the machine gave him $10 in credits for every $1 he put in.

Re: Oh dear ( Score: 5, Insightful )by Skreems ( 598317 ) wrote: on Friday July 20, 2007 @04:26PM ( #19932071 )

Homepage

As TFA says, the casino contacted the winners about the error, and some of them agreed to return their winnings (the casino's total losses were close to $500, 000). Criminal charges are being considered for the remaining 20-odd people who abused the machines. These charges would require a gambler to be brought before a judge and have to prove that he felt "lucky" when the machine gave him $10 in credits for every $1 he put in.

Re:Yay ( Score: 5, Insight)

by Lord_Ultimate ( 1049752 ) wrote: on Friday July 20, 2007 @04:37PM ( #19932245 )

As TFA says, the casino contacted the winners about the error, and some of them agreed to return their winnings (the casino's total losses were close to $500, 000). Criminal charges are being considered for the remaining 20-odd people who abused the machines. These charges would require a gambler to be brought before a judge and have to prove that he felt "lucky" when the machine gave him $10 in credits for every $1 he put in.

Re: Oh dear ( Score: 5, Insightful )by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) wrote: Friday, July 20, 2007 @04:51PM ( #19932469 )

Homepage Diary

As TFA says, the casino contacted the winners about the error, and some of them agreed to return their winnings (the casino's total losses were close to $500, 000). Criminal charges are being considered for the remaining 20-odd people who abused the machines. These charges would require a gambler to be brought before a judge and have to prove that he felt "lucky" when the machine gave him $10 in credits for every $1 he put in.

Re: Oh well (score: 5, insightful)by Hatta ( 162192 ) wrote: on Friday July 20, 2007 @05:10PM ( #19932753 )

Journal

If you follow the rules given to you, you won't be a criminal.

That seems to be the gist of this article.

Re: ( Score: 3, Helpful )

No, in states where gambling is legal, it is legal for casinos to rig the game for the house. For example, they must pay out $0. 96 of every $1 credit to the gambler.

Re:Oh dear ( Score: 5, Helpful )

by Fishead ( 658061 ) wrote: on Friday July 20, 2007 @11:49PM ( #19935471 )

After college, I worked for a lottery company for a short time before getting a real job. I was offered a pretty good paying job at Slot Depot, but I flat out refused for ethical reasons.

As far as I understand it, all slot machines are programmed to give 95-98% payback to the player, but casinos should always have one or two machines programmed for 105% payback. The higher payback machines are always changing, so if you go back looking for a "lucky" machine, you might not get it.

No, in states where gambling is legal, it is legal for casinos to rig the game for the house. For example, they must pay out $0. 96 of every $1 credit to the gambler.

Re: Oh dear ( Score: 5, Helpful)

by Vicissidude ( 878310 ) wrote: on Friday July 20, 2007 @10:01PM ( #19934961 )

Gambling machines are weighted to rig the casino's favor.

Gambling machines are highly regulated in the states in which they operate. The machine processors are checked by the state and are locked and monitored until they are installed in the machine. Employees who service the machines are certified by the state. These employees fill out a one-centimeter form upon hiring for state and federal background checks. In a business once dominated by the mafia, cheating or suspicion of cheating is taken very seriously by the state and federal governments. The machines don't cheat.

Nevertheless, these machines are programmed to benefit from casinos and are different from cheating. In fact, the casino has set a certain rate of payout to a certain percentage, according to the state law. For example, a machine that rarely brings money to a casino like a penny slot generally has the worst payout for players. In the case of a penny slot, the payout is $ 0. 85 for $ 1.

The payout rate depends on what the casino and what they want to do. If you want to attract customers, increase the payout. Also, if you have many customers, you will reduce the profit by reducing the payout. Customers are very sensitive to these payouts. If the player feels that the casino is stingy, that is, if the slot is tight, the player will leave the casino. If the casino is scattered through money, the player is also loose, the player hears the rumors and the people gather in the casino. Everything is supply and supply.

Re: It's the same as the ballot box, right? (Score: 5, insight)

by VICISSIDUDE (878310) Wrotes: on saturday 21, 2007 @02: 04pm ( #19939381)

The security of the voting machine is a laughing story compared to the slot machine. The state is not only accessible to the slot machine source code, but also actually inspects its source code.

It is much easier to deceive voting machines than slot machines, indicating the disappointing priority of today's society.

Re: Yeah (score: 4, interesting)

by vicissidude (878310) Wrote: on saturday 21, 2007 @02: 15pm ( #19939457)

The machine does not adjust the operation according to the player. The machine is running based on the template, and the individual slot's "pull" is randomly determined in the central server room long before the player sits in front of the machine. For example, when the payout rate is 0. 97, there is the following template:

Each time 1, 000 times, 1x 500 points payout 2x 100 points payout 6x 25 point payout 12X 10 points Point payout Total payout: 970 points

No, in states where gambling is legal, it is legal for casinos to rig the game for the house. For example, they must pay out $0. 96 of every $1 credit to the gambler.

Re: Yeah (score: 5, helpful)

by Codebuster (516420) Wrote: On Friday JULY 20, 2007 @07: 22PM ( #19934079)

This should be treated the same as counting cards in blackjack. If you are doing it in your head, without mechanical aid, you are playing within the rules and it is not cheating.

The question of whether card counting constitutes cheating has been, and still is, a hot topic of debate in the gaming industry. Courts have consistently ruled that, under the legal definition of cheating (the definition that gives rise to criminal prosecution), counting cards is not cheating unless assisted by any device, be it mechanical, electronic, or electromechanical. Casinos, on the other hand, not surprisingly, consider all forms of card counting to be "cheating," even if the courts have ruled it legal as "intellectual play" (using your brain). Here's where it gets interesting. In Las Vegas, casinos have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason, and it's not unheard of for card counters to get the backhanded treatment (i. e. casino security thugs trying to verbally intimidate players so they don't come back). But in Atlantic City, casinos aren't allowed to refuse games unless they're open to the public and the player is causing an obvious nuisance. So they use tricks to thwart card counting, like frequently switching decks, dealing from multiple decks, only dealing halfway through a deck, and using automatic shufflers.

The gambling industry is never a good one to be in, either as a player or an owner. Casinos are tough on anyone they perceive as a nuisance to their profits, because the whole gambling atmosphere is already hostile and it's about something everyone wants more of - money. Personally, I'm not that interested in gambling as a form of entertainment, but if you're going to try card counting, I can only say be careful. You won't get better, and the casinos will encourage you to "count" more often, which will put you in their database and get you banned from every casino on the planet.

Re: Oh dear ( Score: 5, Interesting)

by ms139us ( 723585 ) wrote: on Saturday July 21, 2007 @12:12AM ( #19935545 )

The question of whether card counting constitutes cheating has been and remains a hot topic of debate in the gaming industry. Courts have consistently ruled that, according to the legal definition of cheating (the definition that is criminally prosecutable), counting cards is not cheating unless assisted by any device, be it mechanical, electronic, or electromechanical. Meanwhile, casinos, not surprisingly, consider all forms of card counting to be "cheating," even when the courts have made it legal as "intellectual play."

Having been in the gaming industry for some time, with my ex-wife being a professional poker dealer (dealing at the WSOP final table) and myself being a card counter, I have noticed that casinos, at least in the small gambling community, like to have card counters.

First of all, the courts have made it clear that casinos can only offer games of chance. If casinos want to ban card counting because they pay players for it, they cannot offer blackjack because it is not a game of chance.

Back to the point. Most blackjack players are, frankly, terrible. Every once in a while, a good player walks into a casino, counts cards, spends his chips well, and keeps winning. What happens next? Every gambler who passes by that table notices how "hot" it is, sits down, and quickly empties their wallets.

One good, polite, well-tipped card counter promotes the table, pays the dealer well, and fills the house's coffers.

Several pit bosses have approached me and asked how I count.

Re: ( Score: 3, Interesting )

That seems to be the gist of this article.

Re: ( Score: 3, Helpful)

This is called a misjudgment, the deck is pulled out and the tape is reviewed. If you find someone sneaking into your deck, the person will be charged. The deck did not contain two spade kings because there was a special procedure prepared, that is, to open the deck one by one.

Re: (Score: 3, rich insight)

This is called a misjudgment, the deck is pulled out and the tape is reviewed. If you find someone sneaking into your deck, the person will be charged. The deck did not contain two spade kings because there was a special procedure prepared, that is, to open the deck one by one.

Re: (Score: 3, rich insight)

No, in states where gambling is legal, it is legal for casinos to rig the game for the house. For example, they must pay out $0. 96 of every $1 credit to the gambler.

Re: Yeah (score: 5, helpful)

Using more decks does not change the relative ratio of the card (therefore the probability of a specific value). Rather, it is easier to match the probability to empirical expectations. Card counting is to calculate the probability of being observed because a specific card will help you (extend your score without bust) or hinder you (to make you 21 or more). What approaches the possibility of being will be advantageous for you.

Most probability studies assume that there is no memory of the random number mechanism. This is usually correct. Even if you throw 6 6 with dice, the probability of throwing 6 next does not change. However, when playing 21, a kind of memory effect works. Because the cards that have already fallen will never appear again. And it is this memory that the card counter relys on. Once KS is drawn, the probability of the next card is KS. If the number of decks is infinite (the same as returning each card to a random position in the deck after use), the probability of a random card to be KS is always 1/52. If the number of decks is finite, the memory effect is reduced compared to one deck, but it is not completely gone.

You can memorize the order of the single deck, but many do not. The classic "method is suitable for" high "(8-k, the possibility that the cards you have will bust), and" Low "(A-3, 5 tricks are completed. It is to divide it into "middle ring" (4-7). The deck has now found that there are 24 high cards, 12 low cards, and 16 middle ring cards. Knowing how many cards have fallen in each band can judge the possibility of getting the desired card. For example, it is not unreasonable to anticipate that the next card will be a low or moderate card due to the memory effect if there are many high cards. If your card is not advantageous to you (or when it is advantageous for a dealer), bet on a low, when the dealer is likely to bust on the next card.

This is called a misjudgment, the deck is pulled out and the tape is reviewed. If you find someone sneaking into your deck, the person will be charged. The deck did not contain two spade kings because there was a special procedure prepared, that is, to open the deck one by one.

Re: (Score: 3, rich insight)

If the machine is broken, the responsibility is for a casino or a company that provides a machine service. Playing a broken machine is not illegal.

Even if the machine is broken and the customer loses, the casino does not return the money. It is natural that if the machine is broken and the customer gains, it is not necessary to return the money to the casino.

This is called a misjudgment, the deck is pulled out and the tape is reviewed. If you find someone sneaking into your deck, the person will be charged. The deck did not contain two spade kings because there was a special procedure prepared, that is, to open the deck one by one.

Re: (Score: 3, rich insight)

I think the issues are out of the question, but they didn't "play" when they found a problem in the machine. If you put money, you can only get credit. After that, press the button that indicates how much you want to bet on the spin (assuming that you have a minimum credit you need to play). The people in question were to put money, skip the play, and put money on the settlement machine to get the amount of change and pay.

Re: Yeah (score: 4, rich insight)by Skreems ( 598317 ) wrote: on Friday July 20, 2007 @04:26PM ( #19932071 )

Homepage

As said, casinos try to take your money quickly on technical matters and don't try to point out technical mistakes in your play. They even refuse to play with people who look good. Why should you be told about technical mistakes?

This is called a misjudgment, the deck is pulled out and the tape is reviewed. If you find someone sneaking into your deck, the person will be charged. The deck did not contain two spade kings because there was a special procedure prepared, that is, to open the deck one by one.

Re: (Score: 3, Insightful)

As said, casinos try to take your money quickly on technical matters and don't try to point out technical mistakes in your play. They even refuse to play with people who look good. Why should you be told about technical mistakes?

As TFA says, the casino contacted the winners about the error, and some of them agreed to return their winnings (the casino's total losses were close to $500, 000). Criminal charges are being considered for the remaining 20-odd people who abused the machines. These charges would require a gambler to be brought before a judge and have to prove that he felt "lucky" when the machine gave him $10 in credits for every $1 he put in.

Re: Oh dear ( Score: 5, Insightful )

by Vicissidude ( 878310 ) wrote: on Sat, Jul 21, 2007 @02:56PM ( #19939809)

But after you step up and see that you get 10. 0 credits for every dollar you put into the machine and then repeatedly cash out the machine to take advantage of a broken machine, you know that you're doing something that you shouldn't be doing and you need to make sure that you don't use the machine in this way. That's what cheating and stealing is.

If you put a dollar into the penny slot, you get 100 credits for every dollar. If you put a dollar into the nickel slot, you get 20 credits. The slot player may or may not notice the discrepancy between the dollar they put in and the amount of credits they receive. Also, even if a player notices the discrepancy, he or she may attribute it to an incorrect display on the machine and assume that the dollar machine is really a dime machine.

If players actually knew about the glitch, they would see customers walking away with checks for $1 million. In that situation, the casino would realize something was wrong much sooner.

Don't attribute stupidity to malice.

If we can justify borderline illegal behavior for any reason, more people will break the law.

You are assuming that these players did something illegal, or borderline illegal, whatever that means. The last time I checked, it was perfectly legal to do something unless it was specifically deemed illegal.

The fact is, machine manufacturers made these machines, state and federal governments licensed them, casinos willingly made these machines available to play online, people paid to play, and the machines paid out. But the casinos didn't realize the machine was broken, they kept the machine running, and they took players' money on the broken machine for a while.

After weeks or months, they track down innocent players, tell them their slot machine is broken, that they're not entitled to the money they won, and demand their money back. It's very similar to extortion, really. If the machine was broken, they should have turned it off and never taken the money in the first place. Since the casino, state or federal government, or machine manufacturer put the broken machine into operation without properly checking it, the financial responsibility for the machine falls on one of these entities, not on the player.

This is called a misjudgment, the deck is pulled out and the tape is reviewed. If you find someone sneaking into your deck, the person will be charged. The deck did not contain two spade kings because there was a special procedure prepared, that is, to open the deck one by one.

Re: (Score: 3, Insightful)

Don't blame idiots for malice. Put a dollar into a penny machine and get 100 credits. Players can easily assume that the sign for the broken machine is wrong and that they actually sat down at the penny slot. There is no malice in that act.

Several pit bosses have approached me and asked how I count.

Re: (Score: 3, Interesting)

The woman who reported the machine to the casino was right. The casino won't give you your money back if the machine jams.

I agree with the business process, but there is another analogy to consider: theft.

From my understanding (and I may be wrong, so please correct me), the rules on stolen property basically state that you knowingly receive stolen property if a "reasonable person" would conclude that it was stolen, regardless of whether you knew it was stolen or not. So if a guy offers to sell me a new BMW for $500, a "reasonable person" would conclude that the car was stolen.

I consider the bank to be a "reasonable person".

Re: (Score: 3, Funny)

The gambling industry is never a good one to be in, either as a player or an owner. Casinos are tough on anyone they perceive as a nuisance to their profits, because the whole gambling atmosphere is already hostile and it's about something everyone wants more of - money. Personally, I'm not that interested in gambling as a form of entertainment, but if you're going to try card counting, I can only say be careful. You won't get better, and the casinos will encourage you to "count" more often, which will put you in their database and get you banned from every casino on the planet.

Re: Oh dear ( Score: 5, Interesting)by Hatta ( 162192 ) wrote: on Friday July 20, 2007 @05:10PM ( #19932753 )

Journal

No, in states where gambling is legal, it is legal for casinos to rig the game for the house. For example, they must pay out $0. 96 of every $1 credit to the gambler.

Re: Oh dear ( Score: 5, Helpful)

by feld ( 980784 ) wrote: on Friday July 20, 2007 @07:02PM ( #19933909 )

The woman who reported the machine to the casino is right. Casinos don't give you your money back if the machine jams, so it shouldn't be possible to do the opposite.

The gambling industry is never a good one to be in, either as a player or an owner. Casinos are tough on anyone they perceive as a nuisance to their profits, because the whole gambling atmosphere is already hostile and it's about something everyone wants more of - money. Personally, I'm not that interested in gambling as a form of entertainment, but if you're going to try card counting, I can only say be careful. You won't get better, and the casinos will encourage you to "count" more often, which will put you in their database and get you banned from every casino on the planet.

Re: Oh dear (Score: 5, Interesting)

Casinos, by law, cannot pick up change from the floor

This is called a misjudgment, the deck is pulled out and the tape is reviewed. If you find someone sneaking into your deck, the person will be charged. The deck did not contain two spade kings because there was a special procedure prepared, that is, to open the deck one by one.

Re: (Score: 3, Insightful)

Obviously, he believes that your ethics is strict and inflexible. Such ethics often comes from strict religious education. Atheist usually does not particularly particular about the concept of "rules are rules", and tend to look at the actual effects of actions.

The gambling industry is never a good one to be in, either as a player or an owner. Casinos are tough on anyone they perceive as a nuisance to their profits, because the whole gambling atmosphere is already hostile and it's about something everyone wants more of - money. Personally, I'm not that interested in gambling as a form of entertainment, but if you're going to try card counting, I can only say be careful. You won't get better, and the casinos will encourage you to "count" more often, which will put you in their database and get you banned from every casino on the planet.

Re: Yeah (score: 5, interesting)

by Jagspecx (974505) Wrote: On Friday JULY 20, 2007 @07: 31pm ( #19934165)

To be honest, as far as I know, all the machines I have played have converted money into credit.

The gambling industry is never a good one to be in, either as a player or an owner. Casinos are tough on anyone they perceive as a nuisance to their profits, because the whole gambling atmosphere is already hostile and it's about something everyone wants more of - money. Personally, I'm not that interested in gambling as a form of entertainment, but if you're going to try card counting, I can only say be careful. You won't get better, and the casinos will encourage you to "count" more often, which will put you in their database and get you banned from every casino on the planet.

Re: Yeah (score: 5, interesting)

by Danse (1026) Wrote: on Friday JULY 20, 2007 @04: 59pm ( #19932587)

Certainly, as a general policy of US law, it is not allowed to exploit clear mistakes (for example, a wrong label product).

Several pit bosses have approached me and asked how I count.

Re: (Score: 3, interesting)

A price tag is an interesting field of law. Displaying products with a price tag is not an offer to sell at that price, but an invitation for conditional negotiations. When you present a product to the cashier, you offer to buy it at the price of the price tag, but the cashier refuses to sell at that price or has the legal right to offer the opposite. This is the case from the perspective of the contract law.

Several pit bosses have approached me and asked how I count.

Re: (Score: 3, interesting)

However, if the other person makes a mistake and sold it at that price, there is no obligation to return it even if the other person changes his mind or notices later. They did trading. The transaction has been completed.

Amazon doesn't think so. [dvdtalk. com]

Complex feelings (score: 5, interesting)by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) wrote: Friday, July 20, 2007 @04:51PM ( #19932469 )

Homepage Diary

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, the casinos should take at least some responsibility for allowing the faulty machines to give money away. I think it's entirely reasonable to expect casinos to test their machines for such flagrant problems before installing them and letting the public play them. On the other hand, if a slot machine prominently displays the fact that it costs $1 to play, and you get $10 in credits for putting a dollar in, it's painfully obvious to any reasonable person that the machine is messed up. The people playing it should have certainly reported the error, or at least not exploited it. At the very least, I think the casinos will have very strong civil cases against those who exploited the bug, and who didn't give their money back. If it was the other way around, and I put in a $10 bill and got only a $1 credit, hell would be on my side. Just because the error favors the customer and not the company doesn't change the morality of the issue. But as a PR issue, the casinos might be better off not pushing this issue, and instead pushing it onto the people who misprogrammed the slots instead of the paying customers. As for criminal charges, I think it's pretty sneaky to misuse the machines, but I find it hard to imagine they did anything like that.

Re: ( score: 2)

Am I responsible? If they have the authority to change the software and I don't, why is it my fault that it doesn't work properly? Who said it didn't work as intended? They should take full responsibility and swallow their losses as they always do. Otherwise they just don't do anything.

Re:Mixed feelings ( score: 5, interesting)by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) wrote: Friday, July 20, 2007 @04:51PM ( #19932469 )

Homepage Diary

Several pit bosses have approached me and asked how I count.

This would be a good analogy if we were talking about ATMs and not slot machines. But we're not.

The slot machine is saying, "If you put money in the slot and pull the lever, you might win more than you put in." So when the slot machine gives you money, it's doing exactly what it was designed to do.

ATMs say, "If you put in your card and PIN, you can get out the same amount of money as you put in before. So it's clearly wrong to take money out of an ATM.

Am I responsible? If they have the authority to change the software and I don't, why is it my fault that it doesn't work properly? Who said it didn't work as intended? They should take full responsibility and swallow their losses as they always do. Otherwise they just don't do anything.

by wrook ( 134116 ) wrote: on Friday July 20, 2007 @11:14PM ( #19935347 )by Skreems ( 598317 ) wrote: on Friday July 20, 2007 @04:26PM ( #19932071 )

Funny thing, this happened to me at an ATM. Back then you could deposit money and it was instantly available. But the bank held checks for 3 days. So when you deposited a check, the money was removed from your account and added back 3 days later.

When the semester started, I was usually broke. I'd get my paycheck, put it in the ATM, and immediately withdraw money (because I needed it for rent, tuition, stupid stuff like that). Even if I put a hold on the check, my balance never went below 0.

Therefore, there is $ 5. 27 (it was not unusual at the time ;-) on the account, and if you leave a $ 1000 check and pull it out again, you will have a $ 5. 27 balance. If you put a check on hold, you will try to withdraw money, but it will only be $ 0. 27 (strange bug). After that, they returned the check and I have $ 1000. 27.

I always used ATMs to deposit checks because I was always short of cash and was busy. Each time I took the receipt and tried to return the money. Each time, I took the receipt and tried to return the money. There is no problem. "

This lasted for three years. And finally they seemed to fix the bug. I have no idea how much money I got in the end, but it's no exaggeration to say that my tuition has been paid a lot.

Since I presented a receipt to the bank, I have to think that the bank knows the problem and is trying to do damage control by convincing me that there is no problem. In other words, there are some software teams that have three years to fix obvious bugs and have fallen into dysfunction. Who you are, I really have a beer borrowed :-)

Re: Complex feelings (score: 5, rich insight)

by soft_guy (534437) * Wrotes: on saturday 21, 2007 @12: 33am ( #19935623)

ATM is not a game

ATM is easy to use. Easy to understand. Easy to understand. You may also know that $ 40 will result in $ 40, or an error (a lack of funds or a machine cannot make money now).

Slot machines are not similar to ATMs. The light is flashing. It is intentionally confused. It is unlikely that the user will find an error in the article on the slot machine. The user is using machines in the hope that they can get more than they have put in.

When I refill a metro card (New York subway), there is an option to get more credits than the actual amount paid. For example, if you put in $ 20, you will get a $ 24 credit. This is a bonus for using a lot at once. The casino can't help but think that he's doing the same thing.

It is difficult to sympathize with the casino in this situation. Their loss is insignificant. The game at a casino is to win money. In this case, even if you manage to win the money, you can get the money back, even if you can win the money.

So there's no incentive to gamble. I don't gamble and I think gambling should be illegal, so I think that's fine.

Re:Mixed feelings ( Score: 4, Helpful )

by canajin56 ( 660655 ) wrote: on Friday July 20, 2007 @08:24PM ( #19934533 )

You're misunderstanding. It's not just played 10x. It means that when you put money in, it registers as 10x. So you put in $1, cash out, take out $10, put that $10 back in, it registers as $100, cash out $100. You put in another $100, it registers as $1000, and it gets cashed out. Do you think that's reasonable? They've never even used a slot machine. Ignore that it's a slot machine. Let's pretend it's a vending machine full of chips. You put in $1, it says "$10" on top. So you press "return coins" and get $10 in change. You think that's great, so you put the $10 back in, press "return coins" and get more money. Do you think that's perfectly rational? You thought that there was no malice involved and that it was just working as intended.

Re: Complex feelings (score: 5, rich insight)

by Jherek Carnelian ( 831679 ) wrote: on Friday July 20, 2007 @04:48PM ( #19932425 )

On the other hand, if a slot machine prominently displays the fact that it costs $1 to play and you get $10 in credits for putting in a dollar, it's painfully obvious to any rational person that the machine is messed up.

1. There are promotions available on multiple machines and there are signs about them elsewhere in the casino.
2. An "Easter egg" is a thing that's only mentioned in radio commercials and other advertising, designed to lure people into the casino for a "jackpot."

Given that, it's highly unlikely that a broken machine would last long on the floor, and it's very reasonable to expect that it would be a last resort when someone faces this kind of behavior. It's certainly the first time I've heard of such an incident, despite decades of use and hundreds of thousands of such machines.

Re:Mixed feelings (score: 4, insightful)

by Chris Pimlott ( 16212 ) wrote: on Friday July 20, 2007 @10:45PM ( #19935203 )

that's right. Casino always promotes all kinds of "waste", such as free beds, sweepstakes, and doubl e-t o-pay. Many of them go back and forth on a seemingly random day or time zone at first glance. In such a situation, it is extremely natural for gamblers to think that it is a kind of promotion or something.

This is just a passion for responsibility. It is clear that some casino did not test enough before putting the machine on the floor (if the understanding of my flaws was correct, I did not even test it). Responsibilities are not for users, but there.

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, the casinos should take at least some responsibility for allowing the faulty machines to give money away. I think it's entirely reasonable to expect casinos to test their machines for such flagrant problems before installing them and letting the public play them. On the other hand, if a slot machine prominently displays the fact that it costs $1 to play, and you get $10 in credits for putting a dollar in, it's painfully obvious to any reasonable person that the machine is messed up. The people playing it should have certainly reported the error, or at least not exploited it. At the very least, I think the casinos will have very strong civil cases against those who exploited the bug, and who didn't give their money back. If it was the other way around, and I put in a $10 bill and got only a $1 credit, hell would be on my side. Just because the error favors the customer and not the company doesn't change the morality of the issue. But as a PR issue, the casinos might be better off not pushing this issue, and instead pushing it onto the people who misprogrammed the slots instead of the paying customers. As for criminal charges, I think it's pretty sneaky to misuse the machines, but I find it hard to imagine they did anything like that.

Isn't that machine a national qualification? I think it is the responsibility of the person who has authenticated the machine and the responsibility of the casino and the machine maker. If the bug works in the opposite direction, will the casino refund?

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, the casinos should take at least some responsibility for allowing the faulty machines to give money away. I think it's entirely reasonable to expect casinos to test their machines for such flagrant problems before installing them and letting the public play them. On the other hand, if a slot machine prominently displays the fact that it costs $1 to play, and you get $10 in credits for putting a dollar in, it's painfully obvious to any reasonable person that the machine is messed up. The people playing it should have certainly reported the error, or at least not exploited it. At the very least, I think the casinos will have very strong civil cases against those who exploited the bug, and who didn't give their money back. If it was the other way around, and I put in a $10 bill and got only a $1 credit, hell would be on my side. Just because the error favors the customer and not the company doesn't change the morality of the issue. But as a PR issue, the casinos might be better off not pushing this issue, and instead pushing it onto the people who misprogrammed the slots instead of the paying customers. As for criminal charges, I think it's pretty sneaky to misuse the machines, but I find it hard to imagine they did anything like that.

If you get a $ 10 credit in the machine, you'll understand that simply "lucky" is not enough. It may not be so. I have never done a video slot, but there are many arcade games that have no money and credit relationships 1: 1. It is evident that many people believe that if you pull the lever 10 times with a video slot machine, you can buy $ 1.

It's also Jesus and no (score: 4, interesting)

by IRVU (248207) Wrote: on Friday JULY 20, 2007 @04: 32pm ( #19932177)

I agree with your feelings about the simplified summary, but it is important that the casino loss is $ 500, 000. In principle, gambling has a system set so that casinos can be expected to pay off. In other words, the balance is intentionally tilted to the operator. It is not important that the casino has a lot of loss if the loss is lost due to its own negligence (installing a broken system is negligent). It is not important to think that they deserve sympathy. < SPAN> That's right. Casino always promotes all kinds of "waste", such as free beds, sweepstakes, and doubl e-t o-pay. Many of them go back and forth on a seemingly random day or time zone at first glance. In such a situation, it is extremely natural for gamblers to think that it is a kind of promotion or something.

This is just a passion for responsibility. It is clear that some casino did not test enough before putting the machine on the floor (if the understanding of my flaws was correct, I did not even test it). Responsibilities are not for users, but there.

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, the casinos should take at least some responsibility for allowing the faulty machines to give money away. I think it's entirely reasonable to expect casinos to test their machines for such flagrant problems before installing them and letting the public play them. On the other hand, if a slot machine prominently displays the fact that it costs $1 to play, and you get $10 in credits for putting a dollar in, it's painfully obvious to any reasonable person that the machine is messed up. The people playing it should have certainly reported the error, or at least not exploited it. At the very least, I think the casinos will have very strong civil cases against those who exploited the bug, and who didn't give their money back. If it was the other way around, and I put in a $10 bill and got only a $1 credit, hell would be on my side. Just because the error favors the customer and not the company doesn't change the morality of the issue. But as a PR issue, the casinos might be better off not pushing this issue, and instead pushing it onto the people who misprogrammed the slots instead of the paying customers. As for criminal charges, I think it's pretty sneaky to misuse the machines, but I find it hard to imagine they did anything like that.

Isn't that machine a national qualification? I think it is the responsibility of the person who has authenticated the machine and the responsibility of the casino and the machine maker. If the bug works in the opposite direction, will the casino refund?

Re: (Score: 2)

As TFA says, the casino contacted the winners about the error, and some of them agreed to return their winnings (the casino's total losses were close to $500, 000). Criminal charges are being considered for the remaining 20-odd people who abused the machines. These charges would require a gambler to be brought before a judge and have to prove that he felt "lucky" when the machine gave him $10 in credits for every $1 he put in.

It's also Jesus and no (score: 4, interesting)by Skreems ( 598317 ) wrote: on Friday July 20, 2007 @04:26PM ( #19932071 )

I agree with your feelings about the simplified summary, but it is important that the casino loss is $ 500, 000. In principle, gambling has a system set so that casinos can be expected to pay off. In other words, the balance is intentionally tilted to the operator. It is not important that the casino has a lot of loss if the loss is lost due to its own negligence (installing a broken system is negligent). It is not important to think that they deserve sympathy. that's right. Casino always promotes all kinds of "waste", such as free beds, sweepstakes, and doubl e-t o-pay. Many of them go back and forth on a seemingly random day or time zone at first glance. In such a situation, it is extremely natural for gamblers to think that it is a kind of promotion or something.

This is just a passion for responsibility. It is clear that some casino did not test enough before putting the machine on the floor (if the understanding of my flaws was correct, I did not even test it). Responsibilities are not for users, but there.

Re: (Score: 2)

Isn't that machine a national qualification? I think it is the responsibility of the person who has authenticated the machine and the responsibility of the casino and the machine maker. If the bug works in the opposite direction, will the casino refund?

No, in states where gambling is legal, it is legal for casinos to rig the game for the house. For example, they must pay out $0. 96 of every $1 credit to the gambler.

If you get a $ 10 credit in the machine, you'll understand that simply "lucky" is not enough. It may not be so. I have never done a video slot, but there are many arcade games that have no money and credit relationships 1: 1. It is evident that many people believe that if you pull the lever 10 times with a video slot machine, you can buy $ 1.by Hatta ( 162192 ) wrote: on Friday July 20, 2007 @05:10PM ( #19932753 )

Re: (Score: 2)

I agree with your feelings about the simplified summary, but it is important that the casino loss is $ 500, 000. In principle, gambling has a system set so that casinos can be expected to pay off. In other words, the balance is intentionally tilted to the operator. It is not important that the casino has a lot of loss if the loss is lost due to its own negligence (installing a broken system is negligent). It is not important to think that they deserve sympathy.

Several pit bosses have approached me and asked how I count.

Re: (Score: 2)

1. Wow. Since this is Slashdot, I didn't RTFA, but skipped to FP thinking "this is terrible". If the machine kept paying out wins, it's not the user's fault."
2. So thanks to the parents for straight out revealing the truth of the story that the machine didn't recognize the currency correctly and was giving out free money like an ATM defect. Poster, your biased summary completely changed the nature of my first impression. Well done if that was your intention. Oh, and by the way

Re: Oh dear ( Score: 5, Insightful )

by seanadams. com ( 463190 ) * wrotes: on Friday July 20, 2007 @04:39PM ( #19932281 ) Homepage

If you put $1 into a machine and get $10 in credits, you'd think that there was more going on than just being "lucky."

I don't think so. When you walk into a Vegas casino, some of the games look pretty complicated, and when you put $1 in and get $10 in credits, it doesn't really seem like anything to you. I think it's like the ratio of "game dollars" to real dollars, or when you put 25 cents into a video game and it says "1/3" credits (because the game costs 75 cents). Why not 1/4 credits? I'd think nothing of it, just put in money, play a few games, and come out with more dollars than I started with and feel lucky. Who cares? Also, take into account the fact that this was a foreign machine that didn't recognize dollars, according to TFA (does anyone really believe that?). If it really didn't recognize the currency correctly, the instructions on the screen would be poorly translated at best. It might have the wrong currency symbol. Who knows.

Several pit bosses have approached me and asked how I count.

Re: Oh dear ( Score: 5, Helpful )

by NickDngr ( 561211 ) * says: on Friday July 20, 2007 @06:43PM ( #19933711 )

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, the casinos should take at least some responsibility for allowing the faulty machines to give money away. I think it's entirely reasonable to expect casinos to test their machines for such flagrant problems before installing them and letting the public play them. On the other hand, if a slot machine prominently displays the fact that it costs $1 to play, and you get $10 in credits for putting a dollar in, it's painfully obvious to any reasonable person that the machine is messed up. The people playing it should have certainly reported the error, or at least not exploited it. At the very least, I think the casinos will have very strong civil cases against those who exploited the bug, and who didn't give their money back. If it was the other way around, and I put in a $10 bill and got only a $1 credit, hell would be on my side. Just because the error favors the customer and not the company doesn't change the morality of the issue. But as a PR issue, the casinos might be better off not pushing this issue, and instead pushing it onto the people who misprogrammed the slots instead of the paying customers. As for criminal charges, I think it's pretty sneaky to misuse the machines, but I find it hard to imagine they did anything like that.

Consider also the fact that this was a foreign machine that didn't recognize dollars, according to TFA (does anyone really believe that?). If it really didn't recognize the currency correctly, the instructions on the screen would be poorly translated at best. Maybe it had the wrong currency symbol. Who knows.

It wasn't a foreign machine. It was a Bally S6000 machine. These machines have a bank of dip switches on the CPU board to set jurisdiction preferences (including foreign jurisdictions). The slot technician messed up that setting and didn't coin test the game before putting it into service.

Re: ( Score: 3, Interesting )by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) wrote: Friday, July 20, 2007 @04:51PM ( #19932469 ) The plaintiff would have to prove that the defendant knew the 10 to 1 ratio was not just due to the "10 plays for $1" video game.

Plaintiff