A/C in Action: The AP Case

[Luxoris]

I don't know that it really matters for this thread but why are responses here couched in terms of playing online poker being illegal in the US? It isn't, at least at the Federal level. The barriers to entry into the US market are finding a funding intermediary willing to handle US players and stock exchange regulations/risks for the publicly traded companies. However you can look at non-US play for parallels to AC, which avoids the complexity of those barriers...ie wrt to non-US play online gambling is largely unregulated. APs actions and the aftermath are clear indications to me that trusting the "market" to provide critical information to consumers and to lead to Darwinian evolution of that particular business is a dismal failure so far. It is equivalent to the failures in the holistic/herbal supplements...a snake oil business that rips off its consumers for $ billions.

[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]
APs actions and the aftermath are clear indications to me that trusting the "market" to provide critical information to consumers and to lead to Darwinian evolution of that particular business is a dismal failure so far. It is equivalent to the failures in the holistic/herbal supplements...a snake oil business that rips off its consumers for $ billions.


[/ QUOTE ]

Or trashy newspapers, or credit cards, or religions. Just because people have a consumer preference that you understand to be objectively false doesnt mean that it doesnt produce value for that consumer. People lose money at gambling all the time and yet they continue to gamble. Objectively its retarded and irrational, but people do it because they feel it makes their life better.

If someone is a 2bb/100 losing player and this AP scandal costs them .1BB/100 can it really be considered a market failure? It would be nice to have this conversation but nobody has yet to calculate the costs of this scandal to the average player. Everyone is just assuming their conclusions are true based off one irrational high risk tolerence market and then extrapolating this to all markets.

[PITTM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
- The current situation doesn't represent a free market

A: Why not?

[/ QUOTE ]
Artificial barriers to entry placed by the government. The current situation is more representative of a black market than a free market.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is such an exaggeration its not even funny. I am tired of reading this crap from A/C'ists. Its like reading elaines blog where she talks about how great the world would be if we all threw away our tvs, stopped driving cars, etc. Why is everyone so hung up on wasting a ton of time to try to make a completely implausible idea a reality? Its especially funny when A/Cists tell us that our current system was "forced on them". Oh cool, now force your new crappy system on everyone else to balance things out!

[PITTM]

[ QUOTE ]

Statism always gets a free pass. Don't you know the rules? We have to thoroughly prove everything before we begin to have a semblance of a point. But they throw darts and then they're on to something.


[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really not understand why this would be the case?

[Luxoris]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
APs actions and the aftermath are clear indications to me that trusting the "market" to provide critical information to consumers and to lead to Darwinian evolution of that particular business is a dismal failure so far. It is equivalent to the failures in the holistic/herbal supplements...a snake oil business that rips off its consumers for $ billions.


[/ QUOTE ]

Or trashy newspapers, or credit cards, or religions. Just because people have a consumer preference that you understand to be objectively false doesnt mean that it doesnt produce value for that consumer.

[/ QUOTE ] The claim of ACists is that the market maximizes value, not just provides some value.

[ QUOTE ]
People lose money at gambling all the time and yet they continue to gamble. Objectively its retarded and irrational, but people do it because they feel it makes their life better.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then why do you make the claim that its irrational and retarded? It is no more irrational or retarded than renting a DVD.



[ QUOTE ]
If someone is a 2bb/100 losing player and this AP scandal costs them .1BB/100 can it really be considered a market failure?

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course it can. While I don't have a clue whether your numbers are accurate (in fact my recollection is that the cheating occurred in high buy in tournaments and high stakes cash games, where the dollar values were significant to the players), ANY exra cost that consumers in general are unaware of but is known to a segment of the market is a market failure that ACist claim would be corrected for. That self regulating mechanism is fundamental to the success of AC.

[ QUOTE ]
It would be nice to have this conversation but nobody has yet to calculate the costs of this scandal to the average player. Everyone is just assuming their conclusions are true based off one irrational high risk tolerence market and then extrapolating this to all markets.

[/ QUOTE ]

The "high risk tolerance market" is of above average intelligence and above average in computer usage and therefore access to information. Your claim that they are "irrational" is unfounded. Extrapolation of this above average group to markets as whole is valid. You are guilty of what other ACists posting here are guilty of...trying to explain away clear examples of where their basic tenets fail as irrelevant, when in fact they are quite relevant. And you wonder why thinking people dismiss AC as untenable in the real world.

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
However you can look at non-US play for parallels to AC, which avoids the complexity of those barriers...ie wrt to non-US play online gambling is largely unregulated

[/ QUOTE ]

That's very myopic. When certain people are arbitrarily excluded from the market, it affects everyone.

Let's say I run a porn site for 100 people in an office building. I get paid per time spent on my site. Things are going great, and as the revenue comes in I'm able to hire better and better models, and my site is improving rapidly. One wing of the office building is no longer allowed to view pornography. Now only 50 people have the option to view my site. Do you think this will have no effect on the quality of service I am able to offer (and thus the quality of service the "unregulated" half is able to receive)?

Countries are imaginary lines. But human coexistence has tangible consequence, and we do coexist with people who live outside of our imaginary lines. So when you harm one you are harming others too (even if maybe to a small degree). And reciprocally, when one prospers, it helps the rest of us too.

The European market IS effectively regulated, because they are not allowed to reap the benefits that would come if the sites they use were able to do business with people in the US.

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Statism always gets a free pass. Don't you know the rules? We have to thoroughly prove everything before we begin to have a semblance of a point. But they throw darts and then they're on to something.


[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really not understand why this would be the case?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand why it rationally should be the case. Why don't you enlighten me.

[Luxoris]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However you can look at non-US play for parallels to AC, which avoids the complexity of those barriers...ie wrt to non-US play online gambling is largely unregulated

[/ QUOTE ]

That's very myopic. When certain people are arbitrarily excluded from the market, it affects everyone.

Let's say I run a porn site for 100 people in an office building. I get paid per time spent on my site. Things are going great, and as the revenue comes in I'm able to hire better and better models, and my site is improving rapidly. One wing of the office building is no longer allowed to view pornography. Now only 50 people have the option to view my site. Do you think this will have no effect on the quality of service I am able to offer (and thus the quality of service the "unregulated" half is able to receive)?

Countries are imaginary lines. But human coexistence has tangible consequence, and we do coexist with people who live outside of our imaginary lines. So when you harm one you are harming others too (even if maybe to a smaller degree). And reciprocally, when one prospers, it helps the rest of us too.

The European market IS effectively regulated, because they are not allowed to reap the benefits that would come if the sites they use were able to do business with people in the US.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this were true then you are tacitly admitting that the entire world would have to be AC for any given society to be truly AC.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
If someone is a 2bb/100 losing player and this AP scandal costs them .1BB/100 can it really be considered a market failure? It would be nice to have this conversation but nobody has yet to calculate the costs of this scandal to the average player. Everyone is just assuming their conclusions are true based off one irrational high risk tolerence market and then extrapolating this to all markets.

[/ QUOTE ]
I base my conclusions of the premise that most fish would not play there if they knew. I also think trust is essential for both the economy and the fabric of society (and is a huge part of what governments help create), and that lack of that trust is very harmful in the long run.

You can't quantify the total effect it in terms of the EV lost directly from cheating that was caught, any more than you can quantify the impact of the Enron disaster by looking at people who weren't paid.

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However you can look at non-US play for parallels to AC, which avoids the complexity of those barriers...ie wrt to non-US play online gambling is largely unregulated

[/ QUOTE ]

That's very myopic. When certain people are arbitrarily excluded from the market, it affects everyone.

Let's say I run a porn site for 100 people in an office building. I get paid per time spent on my site. Things are going great, and as the revenue comes in I'm able to hire better and better models, and my site is improving rapidly. One wing of the office building is no longer allowed to view pornography. Now only 50 people have the option to view my site. Do you think this will have no effect on the quality of service I am able to offer (and thus the quality of service the "unregulated" half is able to receive)?

Countries are imaginary lines. But human coexistence has tangible consequence, and we do coexist with people who live outside of our imaginary lines. So when you harm one you are harming others too (even if maybe to a smaller degree). And reciprocally, when one prospers, it helps the rest of us too.

The European market IS effectively regulated, because they are not allowed to reap the benefits that would come if the sites they use were able to do business with people in the US.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this were true then you are tacitly admitting that the entire world would have to be AC for any given society to be truly AC.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol.

But why don't you start by explaining to me why what I said might possibly not be true.