Bots and the future of online poker - Page 10

RIIT · #91 10-02-2007, 01:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Victor there are just so many little rules that you know, but you don't know you know. What's a dry flop and what's a drawy flop, for instance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm no computer expert but I can't see how this wouldn't be ridiculously easy to program.

I have no doubt that bots can and will be programmed to beat most low- mid-stakes NL poker games in the not too distant future. The only question is what steps the online poker sites will take to prevent them.

Perhaps the sites will force all players to type in a displayed word every x minutes in order to continue, to prove it is a human being playing. I'm sure there is a better solution than this, but at any rate it's gonna be up to the sites. Everyone saying "NL poker is too complicated for a bot to beat" is very naive IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

backward thinking here

RIIT

RIIT · #92 10-02-2007, 01:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Victor there are just so many little rules that you know, but you don't know you know. What's a dry flop and what's a drawy flop, for instance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm no computer expert but I can't see how this wouldn't be ridiculously easy to program.

I have no doubt that bots can and will be programmed to beat most low- mid-stakes NL poker games in the not too distant future. The only question is what steps the online poker sites will take to prevent them.

Perhaps the sites will force all players to type in a displayed word every x minutes in order to continue, to prove it is a human being playing. I'm sure there is a better solution than this, but at any rate it's gonna be up to the sites. Everyone saying "NL poker is too complicated for a bot to beat" is very naive IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why prevent them? Computer assisted players are a natural part of the internet environment - your thinking is very backward.

It's better for sites to simply tag them and then let players decide for themselves.

RIIT

suzy89222 · #93 10-02-2007, 03:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah it was WPX, they played mostly 10-20 to 30-60 from what i know, there was one player who wasn't definitly a bot but did very well at 100-200. Others were more convinced that he was a bot than myself tho.

[/ QUOTE ]

are you talking about ax123 (or something like that)?

RichardHurtz · #94 10-02-2007, 04:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, there are billions at stake for the poker sites and I have full confidence that they will do everything they can to protect their cash cows.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jesus, you guys are naive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's say youre correct and the sites are unconcerned about bots and losing business when it becomes common knowledge taht the games are filled with bots. What could we possibly do?

Absolutely nothing.

While my position my be naive, it is the only chance we have to keep making money on line if what the OP states comes to be.

I believe in greed. The sites have all the motivation in the world to protect their investments. Even the short sighted sites will see that an unexpoitable bot infestation will kill off their business. The fish that didn't leave on the advice of guys like me would be decimated twice as quickly between the rake and the bots

[/ QUOTE ]

The sites only concern is perception, which is very easy to maintain. In reality they need not do anything to discourage bots. The only thing they need to be concerned with is maintaining an image of fair gaming. This is easily accomplished by responding to players complaints about bots. When one is suspected its reported. They then run some sort of investigation and determine if its a bot or not. Even if they are wrong they still win the battle of perception. Banning one person and confinscating funds and returning funds make for great PR.

disjunction · #95 10-02-2007, 04:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I'm no computer expert but I can't see how this wouldn't be ridiculously easy to program.

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone thinks everyone else's job is easy. Devil's in the details.

DING-DONG YO · #96 10-02-2007, 05:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone thinks everyone else's job is easy. Devil's in the details.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

They actually did some study where people were asked to gauge the difficulty of certain tasks. Sure enough, the less someone knew about a subject, the easier they thought it would be.

r3vbr · #97 10-02-2007, 05:51 PM

I am not worried. Won a lot over 4 years. Money in the bank. When bot's rule it's off to travelling and playing live poker around the world

r3vbr · #98 10-02-2007, 05:55 PM

Bot's will come because AI is developing so fast. That said, it's not only poker that's doomed, it's several other human tasks.. biological has had it's time. Read some Ray Kurtzweil books.

RIIT · #99 10-02-2007, 06:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, there are billions at stake for the poker sites and I have full confidence that they will do everything they can to protect their cash cows.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jesus, you guys are naive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's say youre correct and the sites are unconcerned about bots and losing business when it becomes common knowledge taht the games are filled with bots. What could we possibly do?

Absolutely nothing.

While my position my be naive, it is the only chance we have to keep making money on line if what the OP states comes to be.

I believe in greed. The sites have all the motivation in the world to protect their investments. Even the short sighted sites will see that an unexpoitable bot infestation will kill off their business. The fish that didn't leave on the advice of guys like me would be decimated twice as quickly between the rake and the bots

[/ QUOTE ]

The sites only concern is perception, which is very easy to maintain. In reality they need not do anything to discourage bots. The only thing they need to be concerned with is maintaining an image of fair gaming. This is easily accomplished by responding to players complaints about bots. When one is suspected its reported. They then run some sort of investigation and determine if its a bot or not. Even if they are wrong they still win the battle of perception. Banning one person and confinscating funds and returning funds make for great PR.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually they need not do anything at all. The online game is "fair" by default as long as the site is honest itself (i.e. they shuffle fairly and don't hint players).

Every online player has equal access to every type of computer assistance available. There is no reason for a site to get involved in what players choose to do in the online game as long as the site offers honest mechanics in the first place.

RIIT

RIIT · #**100** 10-02-2007, 07:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'm no computer expert but I can't see how this wouldn't be ridiculously easy to program.

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone thinks everyone else's job is easy. Devil's in the details.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is "very" easy to get a playable bot up and running. However, to get a bot to consistently win is as hard or harder than it is to consistently win without a bot.

It takes much more effort to use a bot than it does to simply start playing immediately without one.

RIIT