Internet Gambling Law Resurfaces 16
hayek writes "The on again off again Internet gambling prohibition act is apparently on again [story from CNN]. The bill, which passed the house, apparently stops credit card companies from completing transactions with offshore casinos. Of course, since these debts are apparently unenforceable anyway, its unclear what the point of the law would be, other than to make clear that lowly college students wanting to gamble over the internet will need to find legal alternatives that are well regulated by U.S. authorities and safer."
I want my money? (Score:1)
Re:I want my money? (Score:2)
In some places (i.e. California) it is illegal to collect gambling debts. A while ago a woman ran up a $70,000 gambling debt and the judge said she didn't have to pay see here [slashdot.org].
Re:I want my money? (Score:2)
If anyone here wishes to try e-gold I'm willing to click you a SMALL quantity. Who knows? I once turned a half gram into a quarter ounce at the casino above, and I like their attitude a lot. (I pay all required Sealand taxes when I play! I tend to lose most times, but it's still fun.).
In truth, as others have commented, this is all about taxes, and when politicians couch it in terms of morality instead of their own raw greed, it's annoying -- but that's US politicians for ya! They're certainly not worried too much about REAL crime (the kind that involves actual victims, instead of willing participants).
JMR
e-Palladium (Score:2)
There are, however, irrevocable internet currencies out there (I sell one, actually)
Imagine a digital rights management infrastructure [microsoft.net] that requires you to pay per view using a metal as currency [e-gold.com]. Not just any metal, a precious [lysator.liu.se] metal.
That's e-Palladium.
Re:e-Palladium (Score:1)
Actually, e-gold is a family of four currencies. Gold is by far the most popular (see stats.e-gold.com for details) and silver is next. Platinum and Palladium are both quite UNpopular (and probably either break-even-barely or lose money for us).
Anyway, I'd be shocked if Microsoft or any "major" internet business mentioned us just yet. All revolutions have to seem impossible before they appeared inevitable in hindsight. While it's not anonymous cash (the US Federal Reserve prints that variety, in green paper) e-gold IS more privacy-friendly than plastic cards are, not that people actually care as much as they SAY they care about privacy, if experience is any guide...
JMR
It's far behind going into a tough home stretch... (Score:1)
In GeekSpeak: looks like vaporware, smells like vaporware,
Disgusting (Score:2)
[/sarcasm]
Re:Disgusting (Score:3, Insightful)
What else doesn't serve a legitimate purpose in our society? Homeless people? We don't need them, they have no purpose. I guess he thinks we should deport them. Other forms of entertainment (Obviously purposeless, since casinos are entertainment, and they have no purpose)? Music, Movies, Playing cards? Well, I guess we don't need DRM laws or extended copyright, because entertainment is illegitimate, and only entertainment companies are pushing for these things.
Ah, the hypocrisy.
Re:Disgusting (Score:2)
The US attitude on gambling sickens me (Score:3, Interesting)
It's not a moral objection to gambling (most of the states either have legalized casinos, legalized dog/horse racing, or state lotteries).
In the case of casinos and dog tracks, very few of those exist. In most cases, there are a fixed number of licenses, and the only way to start a new casino is to buy an existing one and demolish it.
In the case of state lotteries, they are quite obviously the worst method of gambling (from the perspective of how likely you are to come out with more money than you put in). In most states, a sales tax is charged on the ticket. Further, a portion of the remaining bet is deducted for "administrative expenses". And then 50% of the remainder is placed into the prize pool. If the odds of winning the lottery are 1 in 10, a winning $1 bet will pay about $4 (including the $1 bet being returned). This means that you have to be 2.5 times luckier than dumb luck to break even. That's an insane house advantage.
Contrast this with casino games, where the house advantage is significantly smaller, on the order of 5-10%. In sports betting (assuming standard Vegas payout rates, which you should be able to get from whatever bookie you choose; if the book don't offer Vegas payouts, take your money elsewhere), the vig is 4.5% (1/22), meaning that only being slightly better than randomly making bets will break even.
Basically, the only reason that sports betting is illegal in most states is because it would drive state lotteries out of business.
Re:The US attitude on gambling sickens me (Score:2)
Re:The US attitude on gambling sickens me (Score:1)
I'd say it's half and half. We havea State Lottery and there is a push for more, but when it's brought up, people are always NIMBY.
You forgot something (Score:3, Insightful)
You forgot to add "Taxable" to the list
Re:You forgot something (Score:1)