New Jersey Legalizes Online Gambling 62
schwit1 writes "New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie signed a bill Tuesday legalizing Internet gambling. While the bill only allows Atlantic City casino companies to take online bets, the WSJ believes that those casinos will partner with overseas companies that provide services for online gambling, potentially opening up a bigger market. Furthermore, the bill (PDF) will allow bettors from other states to gamble online, so long as regulators determine that the activity isn't prohibited by any federal or state laws. They included setting a 10-year trial period for online betting, and raising the taxes on the Atlantic City casinos' online winnings from 10 to 15 percent. New Jersey became the third state in the nation to legalize gambling over the Internet. Nevada and Delaware have passed laws legalizing Internet betting, which also is going on offshore, untaxed and unregulated."
remember sim city? (Score:4, Informative)
in sim city (i think 2000 or something) enacting the "legalize gambling" ordinance was usually a sign that you were running out of money
Re:remember sim city? (Score:4, Interesting)
It ain't gambling unless the odds of winning or losing and equal
gambling, n - An activity characterised by a balance between winning and losing that is governed by a mixture of skill and chance.
What imaginary dictionary have you been consulting? I checked a bunch and none said that the odds of winning and losing must be equal...
I wish Australia would make online gambling legal, for foreigners only.
Re:remember sim city? (Score:5, Interesting)
Balance is not the same as equal. There is balance across the different outcomes, however the chance of each outcome is not equal. The balance is provided by factoring in the odds offered for each outcome. A less likely outcome will offer better odds.
Re: (Score:1)
So balance is not equal hence imbalance must be equal, let me guess you work in advertising.
Re: (Score:2)
No he just understands balance and equality are not always they same. Sure they can be, but they don't have to be. Imagine a plank on top of a fulcrum at its center. If you put an equal weight on bot ends it will balance and both ends of the plank will be off the ground. Now suppose you move the fulcrum to the left. You will need to put more weight on the left side of the plank for it to wait for it.... Balance.
Hope that helps
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
1.7 million views... really?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No he just understands balance and equality are not always they same. Sure they can be, but they don't have to be. Imagine a plank on top of a fulcrum at its center. If you put an equal weight on bot ends it will balance and both ends of the plank will be off the ground. Now suppose you move the fulcrum to the left. You will need to put more weight on the left side of the plank for it to wait for it.... Balance.
Hope that helps
I agree. In gambling, a good example of this is horse race handicapping. The horses could not possibly be "equal" but by using odds the book makers even out the betting as best they can. Most of the time it works, sometimes a long shot comes in but there should be enough lost wagers on the more favored horses to cover the pay out. Once in a while something astounding happens and the house takes a loss on an event, but most of the time it's the players that pay.
Re: (Score:1)
Why the implied insult?
I tried to provide some context and educate you but you've such a closed and opinionated mind that you aren't able to grasp the different meanings of words in different contexts. Let me guess, your an open-sores advocate and Android fanboi.
Re: (Score:1)
i agree with the difference between balance and equal, but...
your an open-sores advocate and Android fanboi
... that didn't make much sense (what does open-source have to do with this argument again?)
unless you're just troll-baiting, in which case let it roll and we'll see what happens :)
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting note, they choose not only the weak attempt to insult me but also choose to insult two other whole groups of people they obviously dislike, hmm, the common thread they represent a threat to greed.
Re: (Score:1)
So balance is not equal hence imbalance must be equal
that's like saying that light is not bright hence dark must be bright
light can be bright, but it doesn't have to be
balance can be equal, but it doesn't have to be
Re:remember sim city? (Score:5, Informative)
It ain't gambling unless the odds of winning or losing and equal
From the point of view of the UK gambling commission your definition is completely the wrong way round. Things like workplace sweepstakes and lotteries can be run without registering as gambling as long asall the money collected is paid out in prises [gamblingco...ion.gov.uk], i.e. the organiser cannot make a profit.
Re:remember sim city? (Score:5, Insightful)
A zero-sum game is where each participant expects neither to win nor to lose in the long run
Umm, no.
Thats called a fair game. To qualify as a zero-sum game, the only requirement is that for every play of the game that the sum of all wins is the same as the sum of all losses.
All casino games are zero-sum, but none of them are fair games.
Re: (Score:2)
All casino games are zero-sum, but none of them are fair games.
Blackjack and some video poker machines have zero or negative house edge when correctly played.
Re: (Score:1)
it's not gambling for the city... it's a for certain revenue stream. it's not called gambling for that reason; it's called gambling because those that play online are for certain to lose (the money has to come from somewhere), but the sell it based on some small chance of occasionally regaining a small amount of that lost.
Re: (Score:1)
With a country trillions in debt, you act like Sim City wasn't modeled after the real world. Things are no different here.
um, i can't tell if you're being funny, but that was kinda the point of my original post (that nj was running out of money)
Re: (Score:2)
All well and good, but... (Score:2)
Online gambling (with maybe the exception of a couple of states) has never been illegal in the US. However, it IS illegal for US banks to do business with online casinos under a law passed nearly ten years ago. That's a federal law that hasn't been repealed, so how are people supposed to deposit money in accounts with these Jersey casinos?
Re:All well and good, but... (Score:4, Funny)
Bitcoins
Re:All well and good, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
Online gambling (with maybe the exception of a couple of states) has never been illegal in the US. However, it IS illegal for US banks to do business with online casinos under a law passed nearly ten years ago. That's a federal law that hasn't been repealed, so how are people supposed to deposit money in accounts with these Jersey casinos?
Easy. The banks do business with the actual Jersey brick and mortar casino, which then transfers the money to the online casino (taking their small cut along the way). That's the whole reason the Atlantic City casinos are partnering with the foreign online casinos to start with, instead of wanting to take advantage of the lockout on the foreign groups and having the entire U.S. online gambling market to divide up with the Nevada and Delaware operators.
Re: (Score:1)
FTA...
Gamblers would have to set up online accounts with a particular casino, and could set daily limits on their play.
They also would be subject to the same per-hand limits as gamblers physically present in the casino. Casino executives say final rules have to be approved by the gambling enforcement division, but they expect the state to require gamblers to have to appear in person at a casino to open their accounts and verify their age, identity and other personal information. Payouts could be made remote
Re:All well and good, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
People keep saying this. If there was no legal uncertainty Wynn Corporation, MGM and all the other big gaming companies would have been doing it 10 year ago. Gaming over state lines was made illegal in the days of Al Capone. People keep arguing that those statues don't apply because it's the internet rather than telephones (which is frankly an asinine argument). Personally I think the fact that every major gaming house refuses to bet across state lines as better evidence of the reality.
Nevada legalized online gaming, but only in the state of Nevada (you have to be in the state of Nevada to place a wager online and they check it rigorously). I wouldn't be surprised if Jersey does the same thing because frankly they start taking bets online (across state lines) and they are going to have warrants issued in the states that don't allow it and I can guarantee that Utah will be one of them. Any corporation willing to game across state lines better be prepared to have their executives spend some time in jail.
I'm certain that the probability of legal online gambling in the US across state lines is zero. It's been illegal and will continue to be illegal because the states that don't allow gambling will always have the number of votes they need in congress to prevent it. I personally believe this is nothing more Cristie trying to save Atlantic City from collapse by trying to milk gaming addicts across state lines and he's going to fail when the feds come down and say you can't do it across state lines. And if he pushes it this will end any national political career chances. People in states with legal gaming have NO idea big of an issue this is in states that don't allow gaming.
Re: (Score:2)
If there was no legal uncertainty Wynn Corporation, MGM and all the other big gaming companies would have been doing it 10 year ago.
There are different kinds of uncertainty. Something can be completely legal now but risky to invest in because it may not be legal later.
Re: (Score:1)
What if they have controls in place that verify that state of origin? Most states have legal gambling...albeit with sanctioned monopolies. To take it a step further, could a State argue against online gambling in Atlantic City, yet allow PowerBall? A good lawyer can argue in Federal court that gambling isn't illegal in most States/Commonwealths.
For states that don't have monopolistic gambling (like OH) or a lottery, their people can be blocked with the appropriate measures.
Re: (Score:3)
"Cristie trying to save Atlantic City from collapse"
edit mine,
Christie is trying to save the casinos,
this should kill the town....
Being first, Atlantic City had a lot of business, and it came hand in hand with a lot of stranglehold regulation......
now that it's much more commonplace regionally, and the regulation is not so onerous say, in Philadelphia.. those locales are both 'newer' and not so stodgy.. The margin left over after the governmental regulations in place makes other areas a lot more profitab
Re: (Score:1)
Looks like we should have a few Powerball lockups eh?
Re: (Score:1)
Re:All well and good, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
However, it IS illegal for US banks to do business with online casinos under a law passed nearly ten years ago.
Ironic that the biggest gamblers are not allowed to do business with legalized gambling institutions.
Re:All well and good, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
US banks don't gamble. When their trades pay off, they pay executives with the proceeds. When they don't, they get a government bailout. Gamble implies some possibility of a loss.
Re: (Score:1)
It is classified as the armpit of America; I am in NJ
Re: (Score:2)
The sharks are circling ... (Score:2)
... and have been for a while.
I used to work for a large UK gaming company that now has a presence in Nevada and Delaware. They are buying up local US companies so as to expand into that market. They are very good at parting people from their money online I'd expect them to be looking to at least a partnership with, if not an outright purchase of, an Atlantic City casino. This will lead to minimal job creation in the US and funds to be siphoned off into their operation in Gibraltar.
Its the wild west all ove
This NJ libertarian says... meh... (Score:1)
Governments should be completely powerless to do anything about online gambling.
Legalizing it is obviously "a step in the right direction", which will make govt a bit more popular and bring it a bit more tax revenue... Now people will be more likely to gamble in USD's instead of Bitcoins. NJ bureaucrats will pass a zillion laws "regulating" this online activity, as always benefiting their friends. Political kudos from this will be used to distract from some newly-growing tentacle of govt force. Etc.
This
Re: (Score:2)
You NJ Libertarians should take a close look at what Christie says [nj.com] about legalizing online gambling, and then compare it to what he says about legalizing Cannabis.
I always thought online gambling was dumb... (Score:3)
I'm not sure legal and regulated will translate into fair, but it's gotta be closer to it than the offshore sites. Right?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I agree. However, online gambling with Atlantic City will fall under a gaming regulation organization. That doesn't mean it will be a fair, as in free from fraud. But at least there are measures and penalties with teeth if there is fraud. There is a major disincentive for an Atlantic City casino to not monitor their own online gambling applications.
That said, I would never gamble online outside of results that are determined outside the computer...like sports betting. In a casino, I never gamble with m
Antigua (Score:2)
Doesn't this strengthen Antigua's position in the WTO case suspending US copyrights? [slashdot.org]
Speaking of which... any sign yet of a cheap legal music store??
Re: (Score:2)