Internet Poker... doomed from Day 1

[Gregatron]

When you claim that I am essentially using artifical intelligence, you are making a factual error (and a very, very stupid one) as a pretence to questioning my integrity, and the integrity of a LOT of 2p2ers. You are essentially comparing me a Winholdem user or something. Thought implicit, I think that is far more insulting to the shot I took at you.

I don't go ad hominem often. I think only one other time. That said, I should have been more diplomatic. I am not flinging any more monkey crap. If I could take it back I would. Pissy mood today, but feeling better after a +50bb mini-heater.

So, I don't think you are "less than bright," and I'm sorry I said that. Your statement was what I had a problem with. We all choose our words poorly sometiems, so I should have given you the benefit of the doubt.

[Our House]

[ QUOTE ]
I tried getting this answer from the OP and couldn't. Why is having more info in a legal manner unethical just because it's during the game?

Simulatanius internet connnections and using aol is illegal per T&C. Thus it is unethical. As others have said, your using a straw man.

[/ QUOTE ]
My earlier point still stands. It's hardly straw mannish.

It is against Party's T&C for your friend to be looking through your PT stats and tell you about players, what plays to make, or anything at all during the play of the game. I don't see why it would be different if your "friend" is a HUD instead of a person. It's the same freakin' thing, no? Party does not specifically say that HUDs are allowed in their T&C, and saying that "because they aren't mentioned, it's OK" wouldn't justify the use of many many other T&C neglected programs.

What if another program is able to compile and display information in a better manner than a HUD and we aren't aware of it? All of us would feel cheated -- not because we're ignorant and weren't able to find the program -- but because we didn't have the upper hand. No matter what anyone here wants to believe, there ARE programs better than HUDs and they are just as hidden from us as our programs are from non-2+2ers. Party doesn't explicitly say those programs are banned either. Does that make them OK?

I really don't want to get into an argument about semantics, but I've seen where online poker has come from, I see where it is headed, and I don't like it. Any player who, when un-aided, is better than the competition shouldn't like it either.

[Our House]

[ QUOTE ]
When you claim that I am essentially using artifical intelligence, you are making a factual error (and a very, very stupid one) as a pretence to questioning my integrity, and the integrity of a LOT of 2p2ers. You are essentially comparing me a Winholdem user or something. Thought implicit, I think that is far more insulting to the shot I took at you.

I don't go ad hominem often. I think only one other time. That said, I should have been more diplomatic. I am not flinging any more monkey crap. If I could take it back I would. Pissy mood today, but feeling better after a +50bb mini-heater.

So, I don't think you are "less than bright," and I'm sorry I said that.

[/ QUOTE ]
No problem.

[ QUOTE ]
Your statement was what I had a problem with. We all choose our words poorly sometiems, so I should have given you the benefit of the doubt.

[/ QUOTE ]
I still stand behind my statement though. Yes, I am aware of what HUDs are, and I use PA myself to keep up with the competition. AI may have been the wrong choice of words, but you know what I meant in the analogy. I will be more careful when choosing my descriptions in the future.

[crazy canuck]

Many of you are claiming that Party allows HUDs and since they are publicly available the edge gained by them is not unfair.

Well, Pacific allows WinHoldem. Therefore, by your logic I could argue that using WinHoldem on Pacific is perfectly fine. It is available to everyone and it isn't against Pacific's T&Cs.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
From Party's T&C:

[ QUOTE ]
7. Anti-Cheating Software.

We are committed to detecting and preventing software programs that are designed to enable artificial intelligence ('AI Software') to play on our Platforms such as, but not limited to opponent-profiling, player collusion, cheating software or anything else that we deem enables you to have an unfair advantage over other players. You acknowledge that the Company will take measures to detect and prevent the use of such programs and AI Software using methods (including but not limited to reading the list of currently running programs on a player's computer) and you agree not to use any AI Software and/or any such programs. To view frequently asked questions about this topic, go to our Unfair Advantage Policy.

[/ QUOTE ]

They basically say nothing about programs that a free, not-sold, or privately created. Could be a problem. Or, consider this problem:

As a community, 2+2 has access to many "public" programs (free or not) that many outside of our community do not. Do we have a moral obligation to share these programs with the rest of the world? Do we share?

Likewise, there are other communities in Slovenia, Hong Kong, and other (less known) places who also have "public" programs (free or not) that members outside of their community do not. Do they have a moral obligation to share these programs with the rest of the world? Should they? What if these programs are better than ours? Would that give them an "unfair advantage" because they didn't share or advertize?

I don't buy into this "available to everyone" theory. We do our best to acquire what we can and then conceal it once acquired. It's selfishly conditional and most definitely not what the sites want.

[/ QUOTE ]
First off, PT and PA HUD are not anywhere close to AI software. I've programmed AI software in the past an neither of these programs use any algorithms even close to what would be consider AI. They are dumb programs who simply collect data. In the world of AI programming that's a very tiny part of the work.

Second, since when has the 2+2 community or the writers of programs we use "hidden" them from others? You know how I found out about these programs? I read some 2+2 book, checked out the forums, and learned about them from members willing to recommend the software to anyone who posted. I didn't have to have X number of posts. I just asked. I would hardly call that concealing. Hell, anyone who asks me for help with poker I generally point them to these forums.

[/ QUOTE ]

Opponent Profiling?


PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]

How many times do I have to say it-
Party Poker works with Poker Tracker to make it more effiecient. They have no problems with GT+, PAHUD or similar programs.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
Many of you are claiming that Party allows HUDs and since they are publicly available the edge gained by them is not unfair.

Well, Pacific allows WinHoldem. Therefore, by your logic I could argue that using WinHoldem on Pacific is perfectly fine. It is available to everyone and it isn't against Pacific's T&Cs.

[/ QUOTE ]

correct, but I as I have pointed out before, winHoldem is not a good bot so it's ill-advised.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I tried getting this answer from the OP and couldn't. Why is having more info in a legal manner unethical just because it's during the game?

Simulatanius internet connnections and using aol is illegal per T&C. Thus it is unethical. As others have said, your using a straw man.

[/ QUOTE ]
My earlier point still stands. It's hardly straw mannish.

It is against Party's T&C for your friend to be looking through your PT stats and tell you about players, what plays to make, or anything at all during the play of the game. I don't see why it would be different if your "friend" is a HUD instead of a person. It's the same freakin' thing, no? Party does not specifically say that HUDs are allowed in their T&C, and saying that "because they aren't mentioned, it's OK" wouldn't justify the use of many many other T&C neglected programs.

What if another program is able to compile and display information in a better manner than a HUD and we aren't aware of it? All of us would feel cheated -- not because we're ignorant and weren't able to find the program -- but because we didn't have the upper hand. No matter what anyone here wants to believe, there ARE programs better than HUDs and they are just as hidden from us as our programs are from non-2+2ers. Party doesn't explicitly say those programs are banned either. Does that make them OK?

I really don't want to get into an argument about semantics, but I've seen where online poker has come from, I see where it is headed, and I don't like it. Any player who, when un-aided, is better than the competition shouldn't like it either.

[/ QUOTE ]

Programs better then HUDs are illegal. PokerEdge is a similar program to a HUD, and party will give you one warning before banning you.

Party knows about PT and HUDS. It's nothing new. They've taken no action against stopping them, so by defintion they are "cool" with it.

I'm not denying that it;s against T&C to let someone else help you in a hand, but can someone quote where it says this? Seems pretty trivial to me. Two better then average players I doubt could make twice the WR of one, so it would make more sense for them to play individiually.

In poker you do everything you can to get an edge. That's where the profit is. If you cheat to get that edge you are not only unethical, but you deserve respect from no one (and sould get beat the [censored] beaten out of you) gaining edge according to the rules is not only acceptable, it's TO BE EXPECTED. If you don't like that, take the action you, the OP, and a few others have taken and go to a B&M for a smaller hourly (where of course cheating never happens).

[betadecay]

[ QUOTE ]
Many of you are claiming that Party allows HUDs and since they are publicly available the edge gained by them is not unfair.

Well, Pacific allows WinHoldem. Therefore, by your logic I could argue that using WinHoldem on Pacific is perfectly fine. It is available to everyone and it isn't against Pacific's T&Cs.

[/ QUOTE ]

If pacific allows winholdem then why would it be an unfair advantage to use it there? This goes back to the parameters set by a site. I would not doubt that in the future pacific might be a place for people to play their bots against eachother, the same way they do at the bot wsop. This would not be unethical. It would actually be fun. the same way it would be fun to play at a site that allowed colluding.

[crazy canuck]

[ QUOTE ]
If pacific allows winholdem then why would it be an unfair advantage to use it there? This goes back to the parameters set by a site.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most players at Pacific would be shocked to find out about this info. And I guess most 2+2-ers would say this is clearly cheating. Unfortunately, recreational players are uninformed and this is the site's fault. Therefore, just because a site allows something, it doesn't mean it is not unethical.

Similarly to bots, if most recreational players would find out about HUDs, they would clearly oppose it. And the laws should be based on the opinions of recreational players since they form the majority of the player pool.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If pacific allows winholdem then why would it be an unfair advantage to use it there? This goes back to the parameters set by a site.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most players at Pacific would be shocked to find out about this info. And I guess most 2+2-ers would say this is clearly cheating. Unfortunately, recreational players are uninformed and this is the site's fault. Therefore, just because a site allows something, it doesn't mean it is not unethical.

Similarly to bots, if most recreational players would find out about HUDs, they would clearly oppose it. And the laws should be based on the opinions of recreational players since they form the majority of the player pool.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yoou have to accept the T&C of a site before downloading the software/creating an account. As I've said before in the thread, their ignorance is not our fault.

Why should the laws of a privatley owned gaming web site be based on the opinions of recreational players? If that were true, every site would have no rake and the higher VPIP% u had the better chance you'd win

Why does the recreational player mandate? Do they have stock in the company? This is free market capitalism, take the rules or find a place with the rules you want. End of story.