Is This "Old" Datamation Article Still Relevant?
lawh...@hiwaay.net
allegedly exposed major flaws in the card shuffling algorithm used by
a now defunct internet poker site (i.e. "Planet Poker") which I
believe was one of the very first internet poker sites started by none
other than "The Mad Genius" - Mike Caro.
Alan:
Hope you're not playing for money. It's an old article but still
relevant:
http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/entdev/article.php/616221
Stuart
----
This friend of mine (Stuart) is aware that I play poker and seems to
believe that internet poker is still subject to a "non random"
shuffle. I don't know for sure, but I strongly suspect that the
"errors" and deficiencies pointed out in the Datamation piece have
long since been corrected. (I'm 99 percent certain that all the major
online poker sites are now using a 64-bit "key" for the seed to the
random number generator, along with more efficient code algorithms, so
I have a feeling this article is no longer relevant.)
Nowadays, the real problem, (of which Stuart may not be aware), are
insiders passing out "SuperUser" accounts and other more sinister
forms of cheating and manipulation. Whether or not the shuffle is
truly random is the least of our worries.
Alan C. Lawhon
Huntsville, Alabama
Stephen Jacobs
<lawh...@HiWAAY.net> wrote in message
news:6e0b9e59-a42d-42cb...@b14g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
Yeah, that was teething pains. The enduring lesson is that if you want a
message (the sequence of dealt cards) to convey no information about where
it is headed, you would do well to involve some real cryptographers in the
process. I'm reasonably sure that everyone does, now.
The super user problem (of the Russ Hamilton type) can't be enormous,
because now that we've had an example of what it looks like, instances will
stand out clearly. The exception, I guess, would be a site specifically
designed to support cheating, on which a super user can get a new ID for
each playing session (that would also leave footprints, but they'd be
different). The earlier and less virulent form of the super user problem (a
user being able to review full hand histories for anyone he is interested
in) doesn't seem as serious as it once did.
The problem that probably remains is "virtual boiler rooms." Russ G's
actual room with many computers at one location, each with a separate
internet hook-up, would probably be detected today before it had paid off
very many times. But a pack of a couple dozen colluders at different
locations would have no construction costs and could (almost surely does, in
multiples) siphon off a few hundred dollars a day per player for a long time
without detection.
The more fly-by-night sites may have robotic shills skimming a little off
the easy games.
susan
Raider Fan
> I received this hyperlink to a 10-year-old "Datamation" article that
> allegedly exposed major flaws in the card shuffling algorithm used by
> a now defunct internet poker site
Alan,
You seem like a nice enough guy, but I have to say I'm tired of your
whining about internet poker. You obviously don't want to play, so don't
play. Quit bringing your constant concerns to this group.
JMHO.
"This has got to be some sports-related crap, that's all Raiderfan gives a
fuck about." -- Paul Popinjay 2/27/09
------�
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
Ian Stuart
>
> The problem that probably remains is "virtual boiler rooms."
Nonsense. The problem that remains is lack of oversight and regulation.
The semi-archaic nature of the Internet makes that a difficult one to
resolve but if any body stands a chance it is the US federal government.
The sooner they accept the fact that they cannot eradicate Internet
gambling and focus on regulating it the better for all concerned.
_______________________________________________________________________�
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
XaQ Morphy
> Hope you're not playing for money. It's an old article but still
> relevant:
Well it's relevant for some people. For you it's probably relevant. Oh,
by the way, I'm not sure if you got the news, but they've invented
motorized cars now. You can get rid of the horse and buggy.
---
Morphy
xaqm...@donkeymanifesto.com
http://www.donkeymanifesto.com
"I think they are mad that i am borderline psycho" --igotskillz
"It's unfortunate that there are loons on both sides completely
obfuscating what's going on." --Official RGP Mantra
---�
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
risky biz
> On Jul 26 2009 5:31 AM, lawh...@HiWAAY.net wrote:
>
> > I received this hyperlink to a 10-year-old "Datamation" article that
> > allegedly exposed major flaws in the card shuffling algorithm used by
> > a now defunct internet poker site
>
> Alan,
>
> You seem like a nice enough guy, but I have to say I'm tired of your
> whining about internet poker. You obviously don't want to play, so don't
> play. Quit bringing your constant concerns to this group.
>
> JMHO.
Raider Fan: the house nanny
It's a lot more relevant [and interesting, even if dated] than Guns N'
Roses.
risky biz
> On Jul 26 2009 5:31 AM, lawh...@HiWAAY.net wrote:
>
> > Hope you're not playing for money. It's an old article but still
> > relevant:
>
> Well it's relevant for some people. For you it's probably relevant. Oh,
> by the way, I'm not sure if you got the news, but they've invented
> motorized cars now. You can get rid of the horse and buggy.
>
> ---
> Morphy
Is this "Morphy" guy actually more than 12 years old?
Bill Clark
news:51fuj6x...@recgroups.com:
> Nonsense. The problem that remains is lack of oversight and
> regulation. The semi-archaic nature of the Internet makes that a
> difficult one to resolve but if any body stands a chance it is the
> US federal government. The sooner they accept the fact that they
> cannot eradicate Internet gambling and focus on regulating it the
> better for all concerned.
Somehow, based on past success, the US Gov't regulating it does not
give me a warm fuzzy feeling...
--
-bc-
risky biz
Identify some reasons why regulation of gambling in Nevada and Atlantic
City has been a failure.
____________________________________________________________________�
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
Clave
"Bill Clark" <curmu...@senilityis.us> wrote in message
news:Xns9C54C40A53B88cu...@198.186.192.200...
I have yet to see a persuasive argument as to why it's in these offshore
companies' best interests to open up their books and allow themselves to be
fucked in the ass by the US government.
Jim
lawh...@hiwaay.net
wrote:
> "Bill Clark" <curmudg...@senilityis.us> wrote in message
>
> news:Xns9C54C40A53B88cu...@198.186.192.200...
>
> > "Ian Stuart" <spamsu...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in
> >news:51fuj6x...@recgroups.com:
>
> >> Nonsense. The problem that remains is lack of oversight and
> >> regulation. The semi-archaic nature of the Internet makes that a
> >> difficult one to resolve but if any body stands a chance it is the
> >> US federal government. The sooner they accept the fact that they
> >> cannot eradicate Internet gambling and focus on regulating it the
> >> better for all concerned.
>
> > Somehow, based on past success, the US Gov't regulating it does not
> > give me a warm fuzzy feeling...
>
> I have yet to see a persuasive argument as to why it's in these offshore
> companies' best interests to open up their books and allow themselves to be
> fucked in the ass by the US government.
>
> Jim
Jim:
I don't think the U.S. Government's primary interest in these offshore
companies is to "bang them in the bummer" as you so delicately put
it. Rather, it's the taxes (from the players) that they're concerned
with - or the taxes they think players aren't paying! In short, Uncle
Sammy wants his cut. In fact, I suspect that an unintended
consequence of the economic downturn (and ballooning debt and
deficits) may very well be added impetus to legalize, regulate, (and
tax) internet poker. Our elected representatives are coming under
increasing pressure to either raise taxes, cut spending - or both.
These pressures are unrelenting. As the heat in the kitchen keeps
going up, it will only be natural for pols to consider new sources of
revenue that carry the added benefit of not requiring an official "on
the record" vote for a broad-based tax increase that affects everybody
- like a Value Added Tax [VAT] for instance. What better way to
accomplish that goal than by passing legislation that socks it to
"gamblers"? I listened to a recent internet radio interview with PPA
Executive Director John Pappas where he made it clear that he and
Chairman D'Amato are emphasizing the revenue advantages (to the U.S.
Treasury) that would flow from legalizing and regulating internet
poker. This is "reading between the lines," but I got the impression
from listening to Mr. Pappas that the sites themselves, (i.e. Poker
Stars, Full Tilt, Party Gaming, Bodog, et al), may actually support
legalization and taxing of players since legalization will permanently
remove late night attacks on their business (such as the UIGEA) and
the freezing and seizure of funds (such as the recent action
initiated by Assistant U.S. Attorneys in the Southern District of New
York). These attacks and threats to their business are a problem (and
an annoyance) that they would just as soon see go away. If
legalization, regulation and taxation gets the government and
prosecutors (permanently) off their back, then I suspect they may view
this as a good thing - but what do I know?
Bill Clark
news:kstvj6x...@recgroups.com:
> Identify some reasons why regulation of gambling in Nevada and
> Atlantic City has been a failure.
Perhaps it works because of *Local*, rather than the US Gov't,
Regulation!
--
-bc-
risky biz
You're trying to make hay with an anti-regulation argument by claiming
that state regulation is better quality regulation than Federal regulation
and is of a distinctly different character? Then why don't we all just
insist on "good quality" regulation at the Federal level as at the state
level? That dog don't hunt.
---�
Bill Clark
> You're trying to make hay with an anti-regulation argument by
> claiming that state regulation is better quality regulation than
> Federal regulation and is of a distinctly different character?
> Then why don't we all just insist on "good quality" regulation at
> the Federal level as at the state level? That dog don't hunt.
My problem is NOT with regulation but with the gov't, as opposed to
some independent group without a susceptibility to lobbying forces,
doing it...
--
-bc-
Ian Stuart
That's cool. What say you that we push to have the FDA replaced by the
Kahawanake Pharmaceutical Commission?
> --
> -bc-
-------�
risky biz
He'll have to think that one over.