What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
76 Comments
- TheEngineer2008, on 07/20/2009, -1/+41No. Our liberty is important even during recessions.
- StopTheLie, on 07/21/2009, -0/+33You can spend every dollar you have on worthless state lottery "scratch off" tickets. You can mortgage your house and play $5,000 hands of black jack in land based casinos. Hell, you can even bet your kids lunch money at the local CHURCH; but in the "Freest nation on earth" you're not allowed to play online nickel slots from the privacy of your own home, or play poker with your friends.
The American people never asked for online gaming prohibition. As a matter of fact, they fought for years to stop it from passing. So what did the government do? They took advantage of the fear created by 9/11 and snuck this legislation through under a PORT SECURITY BILL!
Business as usual: If they can't sell it, they just do it anyway. - TheEngineer2008, on 07/20/2009, -0/+30Also, wouldn't US-based online poker be better for the economy than having this money head offshore?
- Mouser58907, on 07/21/2009, -0/+25I've signed the poker petition and I play regularly. I play responsibly.
For a land of the "free" I think I should be able to play a 6 dollar tournament in my spare time if I want to. - TheEngineer2008, on 07/20/2009, -0/+25All 51 volunteer PPA State Directors (50 states plus the DC director) are here in DC this week to advocate for poker rights and Internet freedom! Please support the effort by telling Congress to support liberty. You can send a letter is just 60 seconds: http://capwiz.com/pokerplayersalliance/home
Once done, please sign the Poker Petition at: http://www.pokerpetition.com
Thanks! - Jeepy, on 07/21/2009, -0/+19Support the PPA. Poker is not a crime. Thanks for any support you can give.
Obligatory poker metaphor: Don't let special interests bluff you out of the poker revenue pot. - AmnesiacJack, on 07/21/2009, -0/+17The government is going into this battle with a 7-2 offsuit in their hands.
- ChadxINC, on 07/21/2009, -0/+16Uncle Sam wants to get his rake. Greedy ***** politicians.
- mastertop, on 07/21/2009, -1/+17Hi 2+2
- inactive, on 07/21/2009, -0/+14Yeah it's all about taxes here. Uncle Sam wants his cut, but can't figure out a way to get it - so instead, they ban a billion dollar industry. Smart move, morons.
- dsmith5237, on 07/21/2009, -2/+15Poker = game of skill. It's only "gambling" if you don't know anything about the game or are a total idiot. If that's the case, though, your odds are worse than gambling.
- gtawayne, on 07/21/2009, -0/+13Don't worry, they'll suck out.
- MWeather, on 07/21/2009, -1/+12The married kind.
- Jeepy, on 07/21/2009, -0/+11Poker is in question here as it is a skill based game it doesn't completely fall under the category of gambling. Since there are cases that uphold poker, especially tournament poker, as skill based in real world settings there's no logical reason to make it illegal online.
The problem is that the bill to make it illegal was passed during online poker's infancy before it was legitimized as a perfectly reasonable business no different than a local card club. Poker player's are just fighting to repeal a bad decision solely based on discrimination against online users. Censoring and outlawing things because they are set in an online environment should be a scary precedent to digg users.
For a comparison you would better understand (maybe) it would be like making Cal or Starcraft tournaments illegal because they involve a computer game that involves online exchanges (they claim things online can be easily rigged) and the games themselves have an element of luck to them. Any gamer will argue those games take skill but to an outside observer it might seem like random chance determines an outcome of a match. - tsotha, on 07/21/2009, -0/+10The kind of person who plays seriously. It's not uncommon at all to win or lose two or three thousand dollars in the course of an evening if you're playing $30-$60 stakes in a poker game. You don't want to play your friends for that kind of money - you'll end up without any friends.
- SScottAZ, on 07/21/2009, -0/+9It's a question of Liberty!
Go Barney Frank! - allisonaxe, on 07/21/2009, -0/+8playing one hand of poker and only one hand bears an element of luck. poker is really all about the long game, knowing how to respond at any given moment to the opportunities presented in the random cards. probability and statistics, as well as a little psychology all come into play at being a successful player.
I'm of the "Rounders" argument school of thought: if poker is a game of luck, why is it that, year after year, the final tables of the WSOP have the same people? - DamnLogins, on 07/21/2009, -0/+8This is likely to have international implications too. The US is in breach of various WTO rulings. The US has closed themselves off from international trade which is a bad thing. Antigua is especially unhappy as it's damaging their economy.
http://www.antiguawto.com/
It opens the door to a whole raft of possible retaliatory actions, such as ignoring US copyright for example. It would be really cool if TPB moved from Sweden and was actually located in a *real* pirate bay! - Rivetgeek, on 07/21/2009, -0/+8for doing what exactly? if i win a game there aint no ***** way in hell they are getting a cut of MY winnings.
- TheEngineer2008, on 07/21/2009, -0/+8That's ridiculous. Poker has variance, not luck. Over time skill greatly predominates luck.
- dsmith5237, on 07/21/2009, -0/+7Sure it has an element of luck, just like almost every game or sport out there. The element of luck or chance, though, applies to all players equally. What doesn't apply to all players equally is the knowledge of the game, the experience, the innate ability.
Maybe you've never looked into the game to see the math or psychology that goes into it and how those are far more of a factor than luck. You should probably do that before calling anyone deluded, dishonest, and stupid. - eleete, on 07/21/2009, -0/+7Considering they're playing a 23 trillion dollar one, I agree.
- allisonaxe, on 07/21/2009, -0/+6the kind that plays for real money, not piddly 100 bucks here and there from a handful of friends, any day of the week and not just Friday, in her pajamas. *raises hand*
- mastertop, on 07/21/2009, -0/+6[x] you've just proved otherwise
- JoeB4ever, on 07/21/2009, -0/+5thank you
- lhbaker, on 07/21/2009, -1/+6I was going take my family to see a movie tonight. The whole shebang, really; popcorn, soda, candy, etc. But then I decided to stay home and help the economy.
/moron - Inceptious, on 07/21/2009, -0/+5boo hiss
- Stap1eGun, on 07/21/2009, -0/+5Moreover, the law that many claim make online poker illegal, was the Wire Act of 1961, which the article alludes to. It was designed to keep people from betting over the telephone on things like sports or horse races. However, the government only seems intent on using this against internet gambling, even though it was obviously NOT the intent of the law (being created in 1961 and all). The newer law from 2006 says nothing about online poker players, merely that financial institutions cannot handle transactions from online gambling sites.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Wire_Act
http://www.onlinecasinoadvisory.com/casino-news/on ... - gixxer600, on 07/21/2009, -0/+5id say its about 80% skill 20% luck just like what you get dealt pre-flop i guess and what he gets dealt........ the rest is how you bet at it
- TheEngineer2008, on 07/21/2009, -0/+5That's because the sites covered the $40 M of YOUR money that was seized. It's awesome that they covered it, but we need to ensure that these politicians hear from lots of angry voters.
- TheEngineer2008, on 07/21/2009, -1/+6Okay, thanks. Believe it or not, our opponents actually say stuff like that.
- TheUngod, on 07/21/2009, -0/+5Interesting how they figure they could ban it in the first place on a national level. Last time I checked, the constitution didn't say anything about not being able to gamble.
- jellehenkens, on 07/21/2009, -0/+4[ ] hopes the []/[x] BS does start on digg
- paulvq, on 07/21/2009, -2/+6He's being sarcastic.
- tsotha, on 07/21/2009, -0/+4The last few months? It's been illegal for years now. The Democrats were talking about repealing the ban, but like almost everything else they said when they were out of power it was just talk.
- gixxer600, on 07/21/2009, -0/+3Yea its ***** dumb as ***** that its illegal but i haven't heard of people close to me getting any kinds of consequence from uncle sam ...... i can still withdraw and deposit money and get my merchandise just find till they stop that i just dont feel it ...FULL TILT BABY
- sciencelovesyou, on 07/21/2009, -0/+3Well, you're certainly quite the card.
- billjimbob, on 07/21/2009, -5/+8Why do we even bother prosecuting murderers? That's valuable resources that could be used to fix the economy.
- insanebrain, on 07/21/2009, -0/+3Hi 5 !
- WarnerK, on 07/21/2009, -0/+32+2 on Digg?!?!
[x] Head asplode - Stap1eGun, on 07/21/2009, -1/+3[x] P5er here.
- morehands, on 07/21/2009, -0/+2I hope on-line scrabble finally gets banned, its just luck based on your starting tiles
- FullMetalNIN, on 07/21/2009, -0/+2[x] banned for horse pron
- JoeB4ever, on 07/21/2009, -0/+2So I read that whole article and am a little confused. Might have missed something since the article was so long.
Is it the poker part that is in question, or playing poker with real money?
I thought on-line gambling was illegal for a few years now. - dancindrudge, on 07/21/2009, -2/+4This was on Bush's agenda the last few months he was in office...
- Sloi, on 07/21/2009, -6/+8Looks like those poker players are going all in.
Ha... it's funny because I altered an old expression to better SUIT the subject matter. Oh God, somebody kill me. - Stap1eGun, on 07/21/2009, -2/+4They should get a cut the same way they would from a regular casino. Taxes on total winnings. Billions and billions of dollars a year could be made from this for the government if some people weren't so ignorant.
- TheEngineer2008, on 07/21/2009, -1/+3Opponents of liberty who happen to be citizens, though they don't cherish the freedoms that make our nation great.
- TheEngineer2008, on 07/21/2009, -0/+2It says for PPA's own "marketing" -- nothing third party. Big difference. It merely means you may get some updates from the PPA if you don't opt out.
- whiskeythief, on 07/21/2009, -0/+2FTA: "You can lose your house with the click of a mouse,"
This is ridiculous. Its like the talk of "gambling debts". There are no such things as online gambling debt. You pay cash money, up front, before you "sit down at the table".
They can't make an argument against it without these lies.
I am a PPA member. -
Show 51 - 81 of 81 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is