Gotta say Lewis was clearly talking about the deal with Amazon to prime stream and talkover LOTR; TROP So I guess Amazon say you can't mention anything from PJ's trilogy, or mention other fantasy things like GoT.
@@realloud999 lol dang you're right. That's funny cos I remember when I commented that now, and now seeing it again, i dunno how I got mixed up. But Sips moved to England from Canada and flax moved from America to England eh? DARN these convoluted origin stories! lol
Lewis isn't the marrying type. He can't even commit to being not being committed to not committing. Don't get me wrong. I'm sure he'd love to be married to "someone" but that person would have to have an entire life outside of him and be prepared to be his mother, father, keeper and assistant then still have the energy to have sex with him... Whatever sex with the Bristol Pusher might entail. Lord knows.
Loot Boxes are totally gambling and encourage addictive gambling behavior. It is different if it is a specific item in particular that you are purchasing and you know what you are getting, with loot boxes you are paying money on a chance (and sometimes a comically small chance, at that) to get the item or items you want. And a lot of games that kids get into now days have loot boxes, and every kid is going to want the coolest looking item, item with the highest stats or the rarest most epic item. Either they have a friend who plays the same game or see someone online that has these items and then they would want it too. Personally, I don’t mind games that have items you can pay for so long as they are cosmetic and it doesn’t turn a game into a Pay-to-Win game.
Grown adults end up spending thousands of dollars on stupid mobile games, partially from addiction, but also because they don't want to let down their clan/team/whatever that particular game calls it. The social pressure can be huge. The game companies know how deeply they're manipulating people, and we should be terrified how successful they've been at it.
@@knitterknerd The way that a lot of companies in the gaming industry treat gamers is disgusting and the things they get away with is shocking. The sad thing is that people will keep buying into this type of thing and it just keeps fueling the fire. So long as the game companies keep making bank off it, they are encouraged to keep on doing it and then think of even more ways to get more of your money.
The fact that game companies work with psychologists to study human behaviours and find ways to get customers to part with their money using psychology tricks; I find disgusting.
I worked in Japan from 08-12. All of the communications between head office and local offices, as well as from local offices to the classrooms, was done by fax. I think part of it is saving money, they bought faxes years ago and they still work, so why change (like why bother updating a bank's coding language)? But also, with a fax, data isn't stored long enough for it to be particularly vulnerable to data breaches. We have a false image in the West of Japan's relationship with technology. When smart phones were introduced (~2009?), people weren't interested because their flip phones could already do things like record in HD, work as digital wallets (but only at train stations and some convenience stores), watch digital TV (the top part of the flip rotated 90 degrees to be the right resolution), play games in 3D, etc. And much of Japan's web was already formatted for the even older flip phones the screens of which didn't rotate. Being basic in design, these sites didn't look any better on smart phones. The whole reason the rest of the world got emoji is because SoftBank (a Japanese mobile provider) told Apple they'd need emoji for their phones to sell there and it was simpler for Apple to not region lock them (or bother to look up what any of them actually meant 😅) Also, we went through a phase where most people had personal computers in their house, then laptops, then smart phones. Most people never had personal computers, so they only know how to use the couple of programs they need for work (if any). Another interesting example of their hesitancy toward tech is that my bank only had ATMs at it's branches. You couldn't use other bank's ATMs even for a fee. And you could only use the ATMs while the bank was open. Or for a 100 yen charge you could use it from 1 hour before opening, 1 hour after closing, and during their 1 hour lunch break. Yep, they didn't want anything going wrong on their lunch break that they couldn't deal with, so they charged ~$1 to reduce the number of people who used them at that time. It was also rare that anyone paid for anything with credit cards and debit cards aren't a thing there. Even the credit cards that some people use must be paid by the next month. Revolving credit is very uncommon and strange to them. Nor did you pay for things via auto-withdrawal (ACH) from your bank account (because that would involve sharing your bank info). Instead your monthly bills were mailed to you with a bar code and you'd walk to a local convenience store where they'd scan the barcode and you'd pay through them. All of this with cash, mind you. When online shopping became a thing you'd go to the convenience store to buy a card for the amount you wanted to spend online. All of this seems so strange and antiquated to us, but it was certainly much harder for me to impulse buy stuff. I had to physically set aside cash for bills and it was very obvious how much money I had left to spend each month. Thank you for coming to my TedX Talk
To me, gambling has nothing to do with chance. It's all about whether the game requires a player to risk their money for a potential monetary gain as part of the mechanic. Poker is gambling because you're using your money specifically as a part of the game. When you make bets every round, that directly correlates to how much money you've invested in the game. And if you lose, you don't just walk away with no cash prize, you walk away without the money you placed on the table. Yes, maybe professional poker works differently, with a usual entry fee and prize pool, but what about casual games? The majority of poker being played online and in casinos requires you to use hard cash for your bets, and its that casual experience that we have to judge based on. Now imagine you're playing a game of MtG, but every time you played a land you also had to put down a fiver and the winner of the game takes all that money. And this is a part of the official rules. Now its gambling. So what if you're skilled at playing MtG? That just means you win money more than you lose it, it doesn't change the fact that you're still putting money on the table as part of the game, and take money from the opponent if you win. Let's switch games. Now you're playing ranked Dota. But your MMR is tied directly to your bank account. If you're MMR goes up, you get money. If it goes down, you lose money. Now it's gambling. And while the pros might be really skilled and making lots of mulah because they can consistently win, the average schmuck stuck in herald is just hemorrhaging cash with that pipe dream of being Immortal some day.
A fine definition, with good and clear examples. I definitely see your point, and I would not be against this definition becoming the official definition. I have however my own definition as well. Gambling is, in my opinion, a game focused around the concept of "Player versus House". Clear examples of this are games like Slots, Black Jack and Roulette. The House organizes a game that they believe they will be able to, on average, win more than they lose. Any person who want to can become a Player and try to challenge the House. What the Player actually does in the game does not matter for this definition. In Slots, the Player pull the lever and hope that they have luck on their side. There is absolutely no skill involved. Black Jack, on the other hand, have some tactics that can help to increase the Players chances of winning. However, both games are definitely gambling since both games are focused around the "Player versus House" concept. Money does not influence whether a game is gambling or not in this definition. Roulette is always gambling, regardless of what the stakes are, money, matchsticks or life. Poker would NOT be gambling according to my definition. Though Poker is often organized by a House, the game itself is focused on "Player versus Player" (or in some cases "Player versus AI"). The House does not participate in the playing of the game and can not win. The only gains that the House make from Poker and similar games are fees that the Players agree to pay to the organizer. (This does not mean that I endorse playing games for money. I would say that Poker can be defined as Betting, and I hate Betting) When it comes to things like Loot Boxes and Card Packs, these fall into a bit of a grey zone for my definition. On the one hand, they play very similarly to Slots where the Player tries to win something from the House by luck alone. On the other hand, I have never heard of a Loot Box or Card Pack being completely empty, so the Player technically always wins, which goes against the concept of "Player versus House". This is a problem with my definition, and while I personally think these things should be considered Gambling, I can not clearly motivate that using my definition.
@@Bengtssonsan I can see where you're coming from, but I feel like that definition is a little flimsy. Using that definition, horse racing isn't gambling. As far as I know as someone who knows next to nothing about it outside of a bit of googling, the house isn't really involved in the race at all. The odds are generally calculated based on how much money was bet on each horse. The house makes its profit by taking a cut of those bets. Rather than "Player vs House," I'd consider it more "Player vs Everyone else betting". That's pretty similar to poker where the house doesn't actively partake in the game, but takes a portion of the money in each pot. The question then turns into "at what point does betting count gambling?" Personally, I feel like any sort of betting counts as gambling because you're actively risking your money on a per match basis in an attempt to make more money. Is there that much of a difference from making a knowledgeable bet at a roulette table and making a knowledgeable bet on a horse? Whether its player vs player or player vs house, the player doesn't care. They have one goal, which is to walk away with more money than they started. As for loot boxes, they remind me a lot of those kids scratch tickets you used to get from restaurants. The ones where you could only scratch one box and "everything is a winner," but most of the time you just got 50 cents or a free drink or something so marginal that you just threw it out because you couldn't be bothered. You might never lose with loot boxes, but you certainly don't win when you end up with 10 duplicate character skins, and you don't even have that character unlocked.
@@Bengtssonsan A shorter answer: why can't it be both of these things - player vs house AND a game where risking money is intrinsically involved. That certainly represents all of the examples you've both listed. As for loot boxes/card packs it's a good example of player vs house as while you always get something, it isn't necessarily a good something. Often times you get duplicates, which most of the time means you've wasted your money, or something utterly useless, which also results in a waste for everyone besides the company selling the pack: the house. Horse racing is against the house as well, as most odds are quite arbitrary and nothing is a guarantee. It's telling that most people lose money on horse races rather than winning it, even if they are knowledgeable on the subject.
At that point a lot of things are gambling, though. Starting a business, investing in mutual funds or treasury bonds/securities, monthly insurance payments...
I'm literally CURRENTLY having to 'yell' at my insurance company because they're not faxing the hospital for my surgery and vice versa. I dunno how many times over the last month I've had to ask these idiots to fax something. WHY ARE WE STILL USING THESE!?!?! They're everywhere here in the US, at least where I live.
For some reason, the medical field thinks that faxing is more secure for personal information than the alternatives are. No idea how that still persists, but they seem to believe it.
@@knitterknerd While I do think recent over-the-internet security has improved vastly, I can see why they still trust phone lines over internet connections. At the least, phone lines have much reduced number of sources of failure than the internet, even if on the other hand that also means the internet has many more options available when failure does happen. Either way the medical field is a nightmare for any sort of IT development and I wouldn't dare touch it with a 10' pole as a developer.
@@WelcomeBub Fair enough, I suppose, but other fields with secure information have moved on, haven't they? When I worked for a financial institution, for example, we didn't use a fax machine unless someone else required us to. When I did unclaimed property reporting, no state required faxing. They either use secure uploading or mail. If mailed, owner information had to be saved in an encrypted format, usually on a CD, although some allowed a flash drive or, believe it or not, floppy disks. Within the accounting office, our own sensitive information was commonly emailed.
Hopefully I'm not too late but, fax machines are still very alive here in Japan (which is most likely why Nintendo still uses them). The through process is quite literally just: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"
Poker 100% is gambling, but you can influence your odds unlike casino games. Still gambling. Being a poker pro means that you gamble with the odds slightly in your favour (on average). Yes it is a game of skill, but also gambling
This might be the first time ive ever agreed with Pyrion without any asterixs'. I agree that Magic and Poker should not be considered gambling in the legal sense that other casino games for example are.
One of the telltale signs that Sips is bored is when he tries to negate the discussion by ironically say that they solve all the worlds problem. A triforce staple
46:30 why not lessen that kind of administrative work before jingle jam and just get an PA. i'd be happy to be lewis's PA if i lived in bristol. im sure someone can come in and help. i feel like lewis shoulders so much of the work that it can be super exhaustive for him. i mean the yogs do a lot for pre production and actual jingle jam, its crazy.
The real issue with Poker and the difference between it and other card games is that part of the skillset involves putting your own money at risk. Let's say you're playing Bridge, or Mahjong or any other popular card/tabletop game and you enter a real competition with money involved; you do not play *with* the money, you play *for* the money. If you win you get the cash, if not you don't. In Poker, part of the game requires you to use betting your actual own money to play, bluffing requires betting money, the amount of your money you bet influences the actions of your opponents and will determine if you win or not more often than what you actually have in your hands since, generally speaking, it is almost entirely luck what ends up going into your hands. It's the betting of the money that is the crucial part of Poker, other games just have your skillset be tested in an abstract, moneyless environment. Once your own money is at stake in a game the mentality quickly shiftes; it creates mental loops that urge players into certain directions. Of course Poker is not like roulette or slots or even blackjack but it is not a game like any other. Magic and Poker are nothing alike because you're not betting your own money in order to win. Regarding this Twitch thing, what I would ban first and foremost are games in which the house has an edge, however small it may be; slots, blackjack, roulette, video poker. Those are all games where the house will always win, in the end. Poker is obviously played between people and nobody seemingly has an edge over anyone else... except for their own wealth and their resistance to addiction behaviour; if you're very wealthy already taking risks with your money is safer and thus you have an edge over a player who might feel worse at taking risks. Some people also simply fall victim of the old gambling trick of giving you that rush when you win because you have constant dopamine and adrenaline hits; it's always your money on the line and every hand you win you feel gratificated that you've earned more which leads you to keep playing even if you're losing on the chance that you'll win it back. Poker is gambling, it might not be nearly as awful and destructive as some other types of gambling but it could ruin your life and it already ruined many many people's lives so I don't know if it should be allowed; maybe only in streams that are clearly labelled 18+ and who require you to make an account to see them
for a second i thought that fax machine story was still true in 2022. when he said it was 2005 i was like, yeah okay. but now that shit wouldn't fly. the restaurant would be empty. they must have removed it since for that reason. in offices faxes are still around, but not used
Let it be known in this episode, that lewis is for Southern recession, and a return of the confederacy. Odd position for a brit like himself but hey whatever floats his boat I guess That was a joke
There was a clear Scotland / England border for hundreds of years before unification. Also, Scotland pays more into the UK than it takes out, the idea that Scotland was a net-loss contributor to the UK was a fabrication by the London-ran No campaign of 2014, which was rightly corrected within Westminster in recent years. (Not that they wont also try use this argument again in the next referendum) In fact, due to the higher tax payments in Scotland (and a higher tax being introduced in the last three years) , and the fact that Liz Truss just cut the tax for the English highest earners, we will see Scotland is paying even more than the last decade into the UK economy, than the quite frankly pitiful dividend it is receiving. Edit: Also, that Flax comment of "but where does it end?" is just ignorant. Sorry Flax, but it is. Scotland is its own country with completely opposing politics than what is being seen in Westminster this past decade, not only from the government, but also from the shadow cabinet.
Fax machines still get used way too much. Technically, my printer can fax, but who has a landline anymore? So we've had to pay for a faxing service a few times. Health care is the worst offender in the US, I think, but we've mostly done it for the government.
Regarding the Magnus situation... Hans has played 23 games with 100% correlation to stockfish moves (the most popular chess AI) whereas even Magnus tends to play at around 70% and has only played a few games above 90%, mostly games where he achieves a very clear advantage early on. These are MASSIVE indicators that he is cheating. Also Pyrion, Magnus could not make a clear accusation without being sued by Hans for defamation. His actions have triggered everyone to be more aware of cheating in Chess and how big of a problem it is. Currently it is impossible to detect if a GM were to cheat, they would only need to be told when a critical position arises (opponents move is losing) and it would be enough for them to win literally every game. Magnus himself said if he chose to cheat nobody would know and he would be invincible.
@@yeetusyourmeetus No because a highly skilled player cheating only needs to cheat on a single move in a game to have a HUGE advantage.. they wouldnt even need to know what the best move is.. simply when their opponent made an inaccurate move and that would be enough for them to then take the time in that position to work out the rest.. Usually the ones caught cheating (like Hans' has been previously) are from using it for literally every move which yes is obvious because they make moves that go against all theory... That is what Magnus noticed about Hans
Lewis equating a real life suicide by hanging to a video game might be his most old ass boomer take. Thank god he's not planning on children they'd be ruined his weirdness 😂
Anyone born in Scotland can study in University for free using British taxpayers money. That's one thing they will lose. Scotland won't collect much tax from taxpayers. Their population is much smaller. Synergy is key. ...and yes Japan still only accepts fax. A modern yet old fashioned country haha
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
Never thought I would hear the words “Triforce” and “problem solving” in the same sentence but here we are
Really is a shock to the system. We are doomed
@@illpunchyouintheface9094 quite literally lol
Is Lewis comparing a hanging in a video game to Logan Paul filming a real life hanged person?
It would appear that way. Not sure if Lewis is misremembering the Logan incident.
Gotta say Lewis was clearly talking about the deal with Amazon to prime stream and talkover LOTR; TROP
So I guess Amazon say you can't mention anything from PJ's trilogy, or mention other fantasy things like GoT.
Yeah or Saints Row. Don’t mention the earlier and better games, don’t mention Gat or anybody else from the cast of earlier games and don’t mention GTA
Best boiler exchange ever. I could listen to an entire episode of Triforce Sopranos.
I swear Sips has talked about Hyacinth Bucket on this podcast more than any other tv show
im from the US and grew up watching "keeping up appearances" because we got random BBC shows over here and MAN I LOVED THAT SHOW! ❤ what a hidden gem.
I love when Sips knows all about British culture like he was British himself. Maybe he considers himself so...
Considering he's spent more than half his life in the UK I think that makes him so
Dude grew up in England/Britain (same thing? Idk)
@@theoctopusjets5807 ? Pretty sure he grew up in Canada
@@theoctopusjets5807 he grew up in Canada, you're probably thinking about flax
@@realloud999 lol dang you're right. That's funny cos I remember when I commented that now, and now seeing it again, i dunno how I got mixed up. But Sips moved to England from Canada and flax moved from America to England eh? DARN these convoluted origin stories! lol
imagine if the triforce became 3 dads
Or if we kill Lewis it can be 2 dads
Impossible
Good one. :)
Lewis isn't the marrying type. He can't even commit to being not being committed to not committing. Don't get me wrong. I'm sure he'd love to be married to "someone" but that person would have to have an entire life outside of him and be prepared to be his mother, father, keeper and assistant then still have the energy to have sex with him... Whatever sex with the Bristol Pusher might entail. Lord knows.
Loot Boxes are totally gambling and encourage addictive gambling behavior. It is different if it is a specific item in particular that you are purchasing and you know what you are getting, with loot boxes you are paying money on a chance (and sometimes a comically small chance, at that) to get the item or items you want. And a lot of games that kids get into now days have loot boxes, and every kid is going to want the coolest looking item, item with the highest stats or the rarest most epic item. Either they have a friend who plays the same game or see someone online that has these items and then they would want it too. Personally, I don’t mind games that have items you can pay for so long as they are cosmetic and it doesn’t turn a game into a Pay-to-Win game.
Grown adults end up spending thousands of dollars on stupid mobile games, partially from addiction, but also because they don't want to let down their clan/team/whatever that particular game calls it. The social pressure can be huge. The game companies know how deeply they're manipulating people, and we should be terrified how successful they've been at it.
@@knitterknerd The way that a lot of companies in the gaming industry treat gamers is disgusting and the things they get away with is shocking. The sad thing is that people will keep buying into this type of thing and it just keeps fueling the fire. So long as the game companies keep making bank off it, they are encouraged to keep on doing it and then think of even more ways to get more of your money.
The fact that game companies work with psychologists to study human behaviours and find ways to get customers to part with their money using psychology tricks; I find disgusting.
42 seconds ago posted? I click that triforce notification instantly everytime, love you boys
Damn you came faster then the time you lost your v card, faster by a whole second
@@illpunchyouintheface9094 shh you were supposed to not tell anyone
Pyrions impressions are so good
The British dad chat filled with guff at the beginning was great as usual 😂
I worked in Japan from 08-12. All of the communications between head office and local offices, as well as from local offices to the classrooms, was done by fax. I think part of it is saving money, they bought faxes years ago and they still work, so why change (like why bother updating a bank's coding language)? But also, with a fax, data isn't stored long enough for it to be particularly vulnerable to data breaches.
We have a false image in the West of Japan's relationship with technology. When smart phones were introduced (~2009?), people weren't interested because their flip phones could already do things like record in HD, work as digital wallets (but only at train stations and some convenience stores), watch digital TV (the top part of the flip rotated 90 degrees to be the right resolution), play games in 3D, etc. And much of Japan's web was already formatted for the even older flip phones the screens of which didn't rotate. Being basic in design, these sites didn't look any better on smart phones. The whole reason the rest of the world got emoji is because SoftBank (a Japanese mobile provider) told Apple they'd need emoji for their phones to sell there and it was simpler for Apple to not region lock them (or bother to look up what any of them actually meant 😅)
Also, we went through a phase where most people had personal computers in their house, then laptops, then smart phones. Most people never had personal computers, so they only know how to use the couple of programs they need for work (if any).
Another interesting example of their hesitancy toward tech is that my bank only had ATMs at it's branches. You couldn't use other bank's ATMs even for a fee. And you could only use the ATMs while the bank was open. Or for a 100 yen charge you could use it from 1 hour before opening, 1 hour after closing, and during their 1 hour lunch break. Yep, they didn't want anything going wrong on their lunch break that they couldn't deal with, so they charged ~$1 to reduce the number of people who used them at that time. It was also rare that anyone paid for anything with credit cards and debit cards aren't a thing there. Even the credit cards that some people use must be paid by the next month. Revolving credit is very uncommon and strange to them. Nor did you pay for things via auto-withdrawal (ACH) from your bank account (because that would involve sharing your bank info). Instead your monthly bills were mailed to you with a bar code and you'd walk to a local convenience store where they'd scan the barcode and you'd pay through them. All of this with cash, mind you. When online shopping became a thing you'd go to the convenience store to buy a card for the amount you wanted to spend online.
All of this seems so strange and antiquated to us, but it was certainly much harder for me to impulse buy stuff. I had to physically set aside cash for bills and it was very obvious how much money I had left to spend each month.
Thank you for coming to my TedX Talk
To me, gambling has nothing to do with chance. It's all about whether the game requires a player to risk their money for a potential monetary gain as part of the mechanic.
Poker is gambling because you're using your money specifically as a part of the game. When you make bets every round, that directly correlates to how much money you've invested in the game. And if you lose, you don't just walk away with no cash prize, you walk away without the money you placed on the table.
Yes, maybe professional poker works differently, with a usual entry fee and prize pool, but what about casual games? The majority of poker being played online and in casinos requires you to use hard cash for your bets, and its that casual experience that we have to judge based on.
Now imagine you're playing a game of MtG, but every time you played a land you also had to put down a fiver and the winner of the game takes all that money. And this is a part of the official rules. Now its gambling. So what if you're skilled at playing MtG? That just means you win money more than you lose it, it doesn't change the fact that you're still putting money on the table as part of the game, and take money from the opponent if you win.
Let's switch games. Now you're playing ranked Dota. But your MMR is tied directly to your bank account. If you're MMR goes up, you get money. If it goes down, you lose money. Now it's gambling. And while the pros might be really skilled and making lots of mulah because they can consistently win, the average schmuck stuck in herald is just hemorrhaging cash with that pipe dream of being Immortal some day.
A fine definition, with good and clear examples. I definitely see your point, and I would not be against this definition becoming the official definition.
I have however my own definition as well.
Gambling is, in my opinion, a game focused around the concept of "Player versus House". Clear examples of this are games like Slots, Black Jack and Roulette. The House organizes a game that they believe they will be able to, on average, win more than they lose. Any person who want to can become a Player and try to challenge the House.
What the Player actually does in the game does not matter for this definition. In Slots, the Player pull the lever and hope that they have luck on their side. There is absolutely no skill involved. Black Jack, on the other hand, have some tactics that can help to increase the Players chances of winning. However, both games are definitely gambling since both games are focused around the "Player versus House" concept.
Money does not influence whether a game is gambling or not in this definition. Roulette is always gambling, regardless of what the stakes are, money, matchsticks or life.
Poker would NOT be gambling according to my definition. Though Poker is often organized by a House, the game itself is focused on "Player versus Player" (or in some cases "Player versus AI"). The House does not participate in the playing of the game and can not win. The only gains that the House make from Poker and similar games are fees that the Players agree to pay to the organizer.
(This does not mean that I endorse playing games for money. I would say that Poker can be defined as Betting, and I hate Betting)
When it comes to things like Loot Boxes and Card Packs, these fall into a bit of a grey zone for my definition. On the one hand, they play very similarly to Slots where the Player tries to win something from the House by luck alone. On the other hand, I have never heard of a Loot Box or Card Pack being completely empty, so the Player technically always wins, which goes against the concept of "Player versus House". This is a problem with my definition, and while I personally think these things should be considered Gambling, I can not clearly motivate that using my definition.
@@Bengtssonsan I can see where you're coming from, but I feel like that definition is a little flimsy.
Using that definition, horse racing isn't gambling. As far as I know as someone who knows next to nothing about it outside of a bit of googling, the house isn't really involved in the race at all. The odds are generally calculated based on how much money was bet on each horse. The house makes its profit by taking a cut of those bets. Rather than "Player vs House," I'd consider it more "Player vs Everyone else betting". That's pretty similar to poker where the house doesn't actively partake in the game, but takes a portion of the money in each pot.
The question then turns into "at what point does betting count gambling?" Personally, I feel like any sort of betting counts as gambling because you're actively risking your money on a per match basis in an attempt to make more money. Is there that much of a difference from making a knowledgeable bet at a roulette table and making a knowledgeable bet on a horse? Whether its player vs player or player vs house, the player doesn't care. They have one goal, which is to walk away with more money than they started.
As for loot boxes, they remind me a lot of those kids scratch tickets you used to get from restaurants. The ones where you could only scratch one box and "everything is a winner," but most of the time you just got 50 cents or a free drink or something so marginal that you just threw it out because you couldn't be bothered. You might never lose with loot boxes, but you certainly don't win when you end up with 10 duplicate character skins, and you don't even have that character unlocked.
@@Bengtssonsan A shorter answer: why can't it be both of these things - player vs house AND a game where risking money is intrinsically involved.
That certainly represents all of the examples you've both listed. As for loot boxes/card packs it's a good example of player vs house as while you always get something, it isn't necessarily a good something. Often times you get duplicates, which most of the time means you've wasted your money, or something utterly useless, which also results in a waste for everyone besides the company selling the pack: the house.
Horse racing is against the house as well, as most odds are quite arbitrary and nothing is a guarantee. It's telling that most people lose money on horse races rather than winning it, even if they are knowledgeable on the subject.
At that point a lot of things are gambling, though. Starting a business, investing in mutual funds or treasury bonds/securities, monthly insurance payments...
"I feel judged" - sips lolz
I'm literally CURRENTLY having to 'yell' at my insurance company because they're not faxing the hospital for my surgery and vice versa. I dunno how many times over the last month I've had to ask these idiots to fax something.
WHY ARE WE STILL USING THESE!?!?! They're everywhere here in the US, at least where I live.
For some reason, the medical field thinks that faxing is more secure for personal information than the alternatives are. No idea how that still persists, but they seem to believe it.
@@knitterknerd While I do think recent over-the-internet security has improved vastly, I can see why they still trust phone lines over internet connections. At the least, phone lines have much reduced number of sources of failure than the internet, even if on the other hand that also means the internet has many more options available when failure does happen. Either way the medical field is a nightmare for any sort of IT development and I wouldn't dare touch it with a 10' pole as a developer.
@@WelcomeBub Fair enough, I suppose, but other fields with secure information have moved on, haven't they?
When I worked for a financial institution, for example, we didn't use a fax machine unless someone else required us to. When I did unclaimed property reporting, no state required faxing. They either use secure uploading or mail. If mailed, owner information had to be saved in an encrypted format, usually on a CD, although some allowed a flash drive or, believe it or not, floppy disks. Within the accounting office, our own sensitive information was commonly emailed.
Insurance is a gamble.
Hopefully I'm not too late but, fax machines are still very alive here in Japan (which is most likely why Nintendo still uses them). The through process is quite literally just: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"
Yessir my weekly landscaping triforce in rainy seattle
Poker 100% is gambling, but you can influence your odds unlike casino games. Still gambling. Being a poker pro means that you gamble with the odds slightly in your favour (on average). Yes it is a game of skill, but also gambling
This might be the first time ive ever agreed with Pyrion without any asterixs'. I agree that Magic and Poker should not be considered gambling in the legal sense that other casino games for example are.
Payment terms are bigger, the bigger the company. It is internally pushed to have big terms. 90 days is generally accepted, sometimes 60.
One of the telltale signs that Sips is bored is when he tries to negate the discussion by ironically say that they solve all the worlds problem. A triforce staple
46:30 why not lessen that kind of administrative work before jingle jam and just get an PA. i'd be happy to be lewis's PA if i lived in bristol. im sure someone can come in and help. i feel like lewis shoulders so much of the work that it can be super exhaustive for him. i mean the yogs do a lot for pre production and actual jingle jam, its crazy.
Still catching up to you guys. Just 6 months to go
I can't believe they solved the gambling problem!
The real issue with Poker and the difference between it and other card games is that part of the skillset involves putting your own money at risk.
Let's say you're playing Bridge, or Mahjong or any other popular card/tabletop game and you enter a real competition with money involved; you do not play *with* the money, you play *for* the money. If you win you get the cash, if not you don't.
In Poker, part of the game requires you to use betting your actual own money to play, bluffing requires betting money, the amount of your money you bet influences the actions of your opponents and will determine if you win or not more often than what you actually have in your hands since, generally speaking, it is almost entirely luck what ends up going into your hands.
It's the betting of the money that is the crucial part of Poker, other games just have your skillset be tested in an abstract, moneyless environment.
Once your own money is at stake in a game the mentality quickly shiftes; it creates mental loops that urge players into certain directions.
Of course Poker is not like roulette or slots or even blackjack but it is not a game like any other. Magic and Poker are nothing alike because you're not betting your own money in order to win.
Regarding this Twitch thing, what I would ban first and foremost are games in which the house has an edge, however small it may be; slots, blackjack, roulette, video poker. Those are all games where the house will always win, in the end.
Poker is obviously played between people and nobody seemingly has an edge over anyone else... except for their own wealth and their resistance to addiction behaviour; if you're very wealthy already taking risks with your money is safer and thus you have an edge over a player who might feel worse at taking risks.
Some people also simply fall victim of the old gambling trick of giving you that rush when you win because you have constant dopamine and adrenaline hits; it's always your money on the line and every hand you win you feel gratificated that you've earned more which leads you to keep playing even if you're losing on the chance that you'll win it back.
Poker is gambling, it might not be nearly as awful and destructive as some other types of gambling but it could ruin your life and it already ruined many many people's lives so I don't know if it should be allowed; maybe only in streams that are clearly labelled 18+ and who require you to make an account to see them
for a second i thought that fax machine story was still true in 2022. when he said it was 2005 i was like, yeah okay. but now that shit wouldn't fly. the restaurant would be empty. they must have removed it since for that reason. in offices faxes are still around, but not used
Let it be known in this episode, that lewis is for Southern recession, and a return of the confederacy. Odd position for a brit like himself but hey whatever floats his boat I guess
That was a joke
Don't tell 'em Pike!
Canadian train is shit, it WILL be longer than a car ride and a lot more expensive
Anyone have the email for pyrion?
Quebec referendum was like a .2% difference.... They barely stayed in @Sips
I want to know pyrions thoughts on the poker scandal
most of canada lives in the QC and ONT. They are divided from the west.
Ownslow =) best I don't know how to write Onwslows name xD So no Sips isn't the only one
There was a clear Scotland / England border for hundreds of years before unification.
Also, Scotland pays more into the UK than it takes out, the idea that Scotland was a net-loss contributor to the UK was a fabrication by the London-ran No campaign of 2014, which was rightly corrected within Westminster in recent years. (Not that they wont also try use this argument again in the next referendum)
In fact, due to the higher tax payments in Scotland (and a higher tax being introduced in the last three years) , and the fact that Liz Truss just cut the tax for the English highest earners, we will see Scotland is paying even more than the last decade into the UK economy, than the quite frankly pitiful dividend it is receiving.
Edit: Also, that Flax comment of "but where does it end?" is just ignorant. Sorry Flax, but it is. Scotland is its own country with completely opposing politics than what is being seen in Westminster this past decade, not only from the government, but also from the shadow cabinet.
What a podcast lol
my mom watches keeping up appearances
WOOOOOO!
You gamble just by buying a pack of MTG cards gentlemen. The value varies greatly and it's stacked against you by design.
I dunno guys, I can't help but feel you're stepping on the toes of the Zero Degrees podcast here...
#shropshireindependence
What the fuck is this chess story 😂
Poker is allowed on Twitch, it was said specifically there in the post.
Fax machines still get used way too much. Technically, my printer can fax, but who has a landline anymore? So we've had to pay for a faxing service a few times. Health care is the worst offender in the US, I think, but we've mostly done it for the government.
Ide like to apply to become a "well akchooally" fact checker
Regarding the Magnus situation... Hans has played 23 games with 100% correlation to stockfish moves (the most popular chess AI) whereas even Magnus tends to play at around 70% and has only played a few games above 90%, mostly games where he achieves a very clear advantage early on. These are MASSIVE indicators that he is cheating. Also Pyrion, Magnus could not make a clear accusation without being sued by Hans for defamation. His actions have triggered everyone to be more aware of cheating in Chess and how big of a problem it is. Currently it is impossible to detect if a GM were to cheat, they would only need to be told when a critical position arises (opponents move is losing) and it would be enough for them to win literally every game. Magnus himself said if he chose to cheat nobody would know and he would be invincible.
Is "computer chess" not easy to identify and counter for a skilled player?
@@yeetusyourmeetus No because a highly skilled player cheating only needs to cheat on a single move in a game to have a HUGE advantage.. they wouldnt even need to know what the best move is.. simply when their opponent made an inaccurate move and that would be enough for them to then take the time in that position to work out the rest.. Usually the ones caught cheating (like Hans' has been previously) are from using it for literally every move which yes is obvious because they make moves that go against all theory... That is what Magnus noticed about Hans
You guys talking about Ottawa is cringe.
Lewis equating a real life suicide by hanging to a video game might be his most old ass boomer take. Thank god he's not planning on children they'd be ruined his weirdness 😂
If you're not listening to the Triforce on at least 1.5x speed, what are you doing with your life?
Anyone born in Scotland can study in University for free using British taxpayers money. That's one thing they will lose. Scotland won't collect much tax from taxpayers. Their population is much smaller. Synergy is key.
...and yes Japan still only accepts fax. A modern yet old fashioned country haha