War Against the Bots

[questions]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have a question about all of these people complaining about bots, what is really the difference between some guy programming a computer to raise or fold based on position and stats and someone 8 tabling using PAHUD and simply raising or folding depending on the stats of a player in the hand which was collected by a computer?

I mean, lets say someone writes a program thatevery time a guy w/ 30% vpip limps you raise w/ any top PP, t9s+, continuation bet every flop, then check or bet turn based on the guys stats. Is there really a difference between someone doing the same thing themselves by simply looking at another players stats which were collected by a computer program? player sees a 38/2/1 player limp utg, he has JTs and he raises automatically, everytime.

One person using a computer to store information and make decisions is very similar to another person using a different computer program to crunch numbers and then make a decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

The bot sucks the poker economy dry. We want to make it very very hard to run a bot since if it is cheap and easy, someone will quickly set up a very large amount of computers and bleed the fish dry very quickly.

The difference lies in who ultimately makes the decision. If I click the button, I'm makin a choice to do so. If I'm sleeping, and a program presses the button, I'm not making a choice.

It is both the ethical and practical problem that makes bots baaaad..

[/ QUOTE ]

Not being argumentative with you, but I honestly don't get the rationale behind saying in regards to actions ("choices") where a bot makes the choice rather than a person, that the bot's action is inherently unethical.

A bot is a software program that performs functions, but does not make decisions. How can it be said that the performance of a function is unethical?

[Sigurd]

My wording may have been bad, or my reasoning simply may be wrong. Since there are already so much derailing going on, we probably won't do much harm..

Even if I have a piece of software advising/telling me what to do, I can still choose to ignore the advice. If I think that for some reason right or wrong, I should do something different that what the assisting programs are advocaring, I can, and maybe will, do so.

If a bot is playing using some guidelines you have specified, it can't deviate from them. You don't see a piece of software folding a hand because it has to go pee, or suddenly tilt because some monkey made a suckout.
This can't be done by a human. You could threaten to shoot someone if they deviate from "the strategy", but ultimately it is their decision whether they do or not.

[PaulSpears]

Why don't the sites sue the ass off the bot companies? Seems to me the bot companies are conspiring with the botters to defraud (criminal) or conspiring to breach the contract between botter and site (civil).

[Bobo Fett]

[ QUOTE ]
Not being argumentative with you, but I honestly don't get the rationale behind saying in regards to actions ("choices") where a bot makes the choice rather than a person, that the bot's action is inherently unethical.

A bot is a software program that performs functions, but does not make decisions. How can it be said that the performance of a function is unethical?

[/ QUOTE ]
Ethical/unethical...irrelevant. It's against the rules. If bots were allowed to run rampant, the poker economy would be sucked dry.

[Brewmeister B]

[ QUOTE ]
Why not send in the ninja bot killers? That was not a joke.

Actually, another strategy is to just sit at all of their tables and not play. That is more of a ghandi approach. Once the bot call is made, we all swing into action.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is all about money. Theory is FT won't do anything about this situation because it doesn't want to lose a ton of rake from 100K hands/mo players. Some players will stay because they can exploit the bots. Others will leave because while they could possibly stay and exploit the bots, they figure the bots are taking away the money from the fish that they would normally get.

The recurring theme in all of these FT bot posts is that FT was slow to react, slower to act, then the action was to essentially do nothing. The solution is to motivate FT to improve in this area. If they have no motivation because of all of the rake they make from the alleged bot player's tables, then they need to feel the pain monetarily. It won't happen through a boycott as there are plenty of fish in the sea for FT to still make money from these alleged bot player tables. While sitting out to slow the play helps, it is only a piece. IMHO, the clear action is to inform the fish of what is going on. This can be done in a perfectly legal and ethical way. Any time you see one of the alleged bot players at a table, type/paste the following into the chat window:

A player at this table, (name), has been accused of "botting", or using automated software to play his cards with the intent of exploiting the other players and increase his profits. FT closed his account during a 2 month investigation, then publicly announced their investigation was "inconclusive" and reopened the account. At no time was (name) exonerated. All of the previous statements are true and can be verified by FT as a FT representative made the statements publically in an internet forum. Sit at a table with (name) at your own risk.

Everything stated above is true and therefore, FT can have no legal issue with you repeatedly puting this in chat windows. I would think this would slow some of the action that these rake-generating, alleged bots are generating for FT.

[MrGatorade]

I have been fighting a war agaisnt the bots for 4 years now. Everyone said I was nuts, crazy and out of my mind hence why I am called Crazy Mike. The anti bot stuff is out there all you have to do is find it and then tell support that you want them to ban the bots. enough of us they will have to put some sort of anti bot software up.

-MrGatorade (Crazy Mike)

[DrewOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
Why don't the sites sue the ass off the bot companies? Seems to me the bot companies are conspiring with the botters to defraud (criminal) or conspiring to breach the contract between botter and site (civil).

[/ QUOTE ]

Because the really good bots probably are not "companies." They are likely individuals who build the bots primarily for their own use.

Aside from that, how exactly is Full Tilt going to sue the makers of WinHoldEm? If I'm not mistaken, WinHoldEm is based in Atlanta, or at least Roy Bornert has his office there.

Many of our politicians and judges consider online poker to be illegal (everyone on these forums knows otherwise, but that is irrelevant in this case). Can you imagine a poker site taking the stance - "We engage in an activity that may be illegal in your country, so can you please help us stop someone who helps others cheat at this activity?"

[sightless]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a question about all of these people complaining about bots, what is really the difference between some guy programming a computer to raise or fold based on position and stats and someone 8 tabling using PAHUD and simply raising or folding depending on the stats of a player in the hand which was collected by a computer?

I mean, lets say someone writes a program thatevery time a guy w/ 30% vpip limps you raise w/ any top PP, t9s+, continuation bet every flop, then check or bet turn based on the guys stats. Is there really a difference between someone doing the same thing themselves by simply looking at another players stats which were collected by a computer program? player sees a 38/2/1 player limp utg, he has JTs and he raises automatically, everytime.

One person using a computer to store information and make decisions is very similar to another person using a different computer program to crunch numbers and then make a decision.

[/ QUOTE ]


I think its because they play a lot and take a lot of money from bad players