--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "seedub49" <seedub49@...> wrote:
>
> How can this not be considered cheating?
Well, the Feds don't seem to think it is cheating. They have dropped the hacking charges.
>
> They've manipulated a situation so that they would be paid multiple times on a single betting transaction and at greater than the advertised odds. How is this not in violation of the posted rules?
>
What posted rules? And all he did was press some buttons. Doesn't IGT have some responsibility for the integrity of the machine?
> While I agree this is not a legitimate hacking case and I don't see how it should be a wire fraud case, it should certainly be prosecuted. To me it would be the same as playing a $100 hand of blackjack, winning and getting paid, somehow distracting a not-so-bright dealer so that you can collect your win and pad the bet with a stack of black chips and getting paid again on that.
Your example is a lot different than the video poker example. This player doesn't 'distract' the machine. He stumbled on a key sequence ( either intentionally put into the software or not caught during the debug phase) and used it. Unethical? Maybe. Illegal? A much less clearcut answer. And I'm pretty sure there are written rules about past posting at table games. What written rule did this person violate?
>
> The only difference between cheating a machine and cheating a human dealer is that a lot of people apparently feel they have a better chance of getting away with it on a machine. Then when they do get caught they feel like they should just be able to play stupid and get a slap on the wrist.
>
Or they feel that huge, billion dollar companies should be responsible for the product they present to their customers.
IGT let a horrible situation get out into the field. This person make some money on it and by his greed exposed the issue. IGT should thank him.
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (11) |
