Bitcoin gambling walking the line?

[MiningUK14]

Just noticed the banner's on the site and I remembered last month in London I saw 'Betcoin' exhibiting along side all of the big players in the gambling world at the London Affiliates Conference in Earls Court. It was strange to see something which I considered so niche at such a mainstream event, and believe it or not the people who I was with had never even heard of Bitcoin! What struck me was the brazenness of exhibiting at an event like this.

I'm guessing they, or any Bitcoin gambling sites, don't have gambling licenses! Has there ever been a ruling on gambling with Bitcoin? They certainly wouldn't be exhibiting at any conferences in the US?! Seeing them there just didn't sit right with me, it sort of went against the whole Bitcoin anonomity ethos. I thought something similar when I saw an article about Predictious and the guy who owns the site gave what I believe to be his real name and location. Considering Intrade was shut down and suits filed against them by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission it's surely a foolish move by "Flavion Charlon"?!

http://i59.tinypic.com/s1nqfd.jpg

[1715188063]

1715188063

[Beliathon]

I bet you my life and livelihood the dollar implodes at least a century before Bitcoin does.

[IrishFutbol]

Think of them like the online poker websites that were illegal, yet advertised anyway.  Until they actually start seeing some major cash, the governments won't bother with them.

[j3steven]

What doesn't sit well with me is the fact that this guy tucks in his sweatshirt

[imrehg]

I was actually thinking about bitcoin gambling. There are a few people here in Taiwan who were asking theoretical questions - and the lawyers' view seem to be: don't do it unless you wanna go to prison.

I was thinking, why do governments have such monopoly over gambling. Can it be because before there were not a single way to verify that you got a fair deal in a gamble? The government is kinda stepping in: you cannot trust anyone, but of course you got to trust us ("we are the government after all"), and since you can only trust us, we can be the only ones doing gambling.

But now, with bitcoin and provably fair games, that is not like that. Eg. state lotteries can be (and probably are) bent, but correctly done cryptography cannot be bent.

Because of this, if it was a just world, wouldn't the days of unverifiable gambling (including state-run, licensed) be numbered?

[IrishFutbol]

I was actually thinking about bitcoin gambling. There are a few people here in Taiwan who were asking theoretical questions - and the lawyers' view seem to be: don't do it unless you wanna go to prison.

I was thinking, why do governments have such monopoly over gambling. Can it be because before there were not a single way to verify that you got a fair deal in a gamble? The government is kinda stepping in: you cannot trust anyone, but of course you got to trust us ("we are the government after all"), and since you can only trust us, we can be the only ones doing gambling.

But now, with bitcoin and provably fair games, that is not like that. Eg. state lotteries can be (and probably are) bent, but correctly done cryptography cannot be bent.

Because of this, if it was a just world, wouldn't the days of unverifiable gambling (including state-run, licensed) be numbered?

1. As you mentioned, part of it is the trust issue.  Not to mention that even sites that run fair odds games can still run off with your money whenever they please.

2. Impact on society.  The government, and the rest of the world, gets to deal with the consequences when some father runs off and blows his paycheck and savings at a casino. 

3. It's viewed as a vice.  Some people view gambling as amoral.  Others view it as a tax on the poor.  And many wish to either outright ban it, or at least limit the access.

[imrehg]

1. As you mentioned, part of it is the trust issue.  Not to mention that even sites that run fair odds games can still run off with your money whenever they please.

That's totally true! I'm just thinking that people came up with methods to have bitcoin exchanges and wallet services that cannot run off with your money (m-of-n addresses, nLockTime transactions, that sort of things), I think it's a matter of time to come up with a right combination of bitcoin features to make it 0-trust. In the meantime, there's the bitbet.us model of not-0-trust-but-total-verifiability ("I can run away with your money, but on the other hand I can show you that I haven't run away with anyone's money so far in X amount of business), which is also only possible with Bitcoin.

2. Impact on society.  The government, and the rest of the world, gets to deal with the consequences when some father runs off and blows his paycheck and savings at a casino. 

Granted!

3. It's viewed as a vice.  Some people view gambling as amoral.  Others view it as a tax on the poor.  And many wish to either outright ban it, or at least limit the access.

Yeah, casino-type gambling is indeed perceived like that, and often not without cause.
Instead of those, I'm more thinking of the state lottery examples. E.g. in England it is used to fund projects for the public good. Everywhere there's a lot of popular support and often even encouragement (in the media, society) for lottery, or sports betting whenever "the stars look good". Thus it's not all clear, more of an inconsistent cognitive stage.

There's a need for a conversation, exactly the topics you mentioned.

[5thStreetResearch]

I bet you my life and livelihood the dollar implodes at least a century before Bitcoin does.

delusional much?

[waldox]

there is not much to do with bitcoin
so bitcoin gambling has become really popular

[nazban]

What doesn't sit well with me is the fact that this guy tucks in his sweatshirt

That made me laugh, but I'm still building my BTC so I would never gamble it on a gambling site, I however gamble DOGE since I have plenty of it and it is fun. Casinos out here in Las Vegas will accept BTC for restaurants, the gift shops, alcohol and cigarettes but laws need to be made before you can use BTC to gamble or buy chips to gamble.

[BADecker]

What if someone found a way to uniquely identify matchsticks. Could you imagine gambling with matchsticks that were identifiable to certain people in such a way that they could not be double spent, and that their identity could not be stolen? Poker for matchsticks.

Government controlled gambling is supposed to be about keeping people from hurting each other and themselves. And it IS about that, a tiny bit. But mostly it is about making sure that big business isn't hurt by people encroaching on big business's profits. Government has become the pivot point of big business, allowing enough freedom to people so that they are happily productive, yet keeping them in bondage enough so that they are profitable for big business as much as possible.

Who am I hurting if I gamble? Myself? Isn't that MY business as long as I am not hurting anyone else? If I cause big business to be less profitable by my freedom, am I hurting them? Or are they hurting me by not letting me be free, just so that they can profit a little more?

Some lady in India has a political beef with some local government over there. So, in 2000 she went on a hunger strike, a total fast. They have a law, that attempted suicide is punishable by one year in prison. When it became apparent that she was going to starve herself to death, they called that attempted suicide, threw her in jail for a year, and force fed her through a tube in her nose. After the year was up, they freed her, and she picked up where she left off with her hunger strike. And the cycle continues until today.

The point is, Bitcoin is going to allow freedom in such a way that big business will be destroyed. It may not happen fast. It might not be easy. But the banking system on which big business rides is just about destroying itself already.

Of course, it won't be Bitcoin entirely. Counterparty is active. Mastercoin (not the coin) is coming online. MaidSafe is activating. There are many free Internet protocols like Tor and I2P that are eating into big business right now. As people innovate using all of these and others, soon they will figure out ways to bypass governments and big business, become behind-the-scenes freedom governments, and freedom will abound for a while.

Then, people using Bitcoin-style freedom will attempt to enslave other people, and the cycle will start all over again. Who knows what havoc or freedom the quantum computer will reek when it comes online?

[IrishFutbol]

What if someone found a way to uniquely identify matchsticks. Could you imagine gambling with matchsticks that were identifiable to certain people in such a way that they could not be double spent, and that their identity could not be stolen? Poker for matchsticks.

Government controlled gambling is supposed to be about keeping people from hurting each other and themselves. And it IS about that, a tiny bit. But mostly it is about making sure that big business isn't hurt by people encroaching on big business's profits. Government has become the pivot point of big business, allowing enough freedom to people so that they are happily productive, yet keeping them in bondage enough so that they are profitable for big business as much as possible.

Who am I hurting if I gamble? Myself? Isn't that MY business as long as I am not hurting anyone else? If I cause big business to be less profitable by my freedom, am I hurting them? Or are they hurting me by not letting me be free, just so that they can profit a little more?

Some lady in India has a political beef with some local government over there. So, in 2000 she went on a hunger strike, a total fast. They have a law, that attempted suicide is punishable by one year in prison. When it became apparent that she was going to starve herself to death, they called that attempted suicide, threw her in jail for a year, and force fed her through a tube in her nose. After the year was up, they freed her, and she picked up where she left off with her hunger strike. And the cycle continues until today.

The point is, Bitcoin is going to allow freedom in such a way that big business will be destroyed. It may not happen fast. It might not be easy. But the banking system on which big business rides is just about destroying itself already.

Of course, it won't be Bitcoin entirely. Counterparty is active. Mastercoin (not the coin) is coming online. MaidSafe is activating. There are many free Internet protocols like Tor and I2P that are eating into big business right now. As people innovate using all of these and others, soon they will figure out ways to bypass governments and big business, become behind-the-scenes freedom governments, and freedom will abound for a while.

Then, people using Bitcoin-style freedom will attempt to enslave other people, and the cycle will start all over again. Who knows what havoc or freedom the quantum computer will reek when it comes online?

No, it's not going to result in this.

First, controlled economies are the result of people asking for them, not the other way around.  Read up on the economic history from the 1800s.  Currency swings utterly devastated businesses (especially farmers).  People want a stable currency where something that costs $100 today isn't going to cost $20 or $500 a year from now.  Central banks ensure that this happens.

Second, large businesses are the result of economies of scale advantages.  BitCoin isn't going to suddenly allow a Mom and Pop shop to compete against WalMart, Ford, ExxonMobil, etc.  There's just too many advantages that large corporations have to offer to imagine that they'll collapse.

Third, you can't simultaneously ask the government to but out, then say that things need to be done to prevent another Mt.Gox.  You may not have been saying both, but plenty of people get upset when they get ripped off, and wouldn't want a lawless world.

Fourth, the banking system will not die.  People need loans.  Students need loans.  Businesses need loans.  Cities, states, and countries need loans.  And you're a fool if you think people would rather keep money/BTC in a private wallet that provides no return over a bank that would offer them a return on their deposit.