Not part of the discussion. You are straining pretty hard in your efforts to “win”.
I am making an example to prove a point. The point is simple “industry” doesn’t contain the scammers who try to abuse it.
Yes, they do. The clue is in the name.
Genius take!
Answer the question, though. I repost it for your own convenience. We clear out all the bullshit semantic you brought up, and go straight to the point:
Let’s pretend you actually believe your bs, and let’s make a distinction:
Online casinos = established businesses in the casino industry, operating with at least a license.
Fake casinos = scam websites that operate without a license and which spoof an online casino with the purpose of scamming users (in whatever way).
To which ones do you think your initial answer applies:
They run rigged games in predatory ways. They happily let organised crime launder money for a cut. They fight regulations designed to reduce problem gambling.
?
Do you think that online casinos as defined above run rigged games?
Answer the question, your definition doesn’t add much.
To which ones does your initial answer apply? Both legitimate and fake casinos?
It’s not a hard question.
P.s.
I bet you wouldn’t be able to show me a fake casino if I asked. That’s because they are not a common problem. You are overinflating it to make your absurd definition more reasonable. But let’s not get into this…
So both legitimate and fake?
In other words you believe that both legitimate and fake casinos rig games, both help laundering money and both fight against regulations?
It’s a simple question, show a tiny bit of good faith :)
P.s., have you read your own link?
The blacklisting reasons have to do with scammy customer support, lack of license, stealing money. They don’t even mention rigging games or laundering money, which is what you claimed :)
It’s YOUR definition ahahah I literally took what you said and I am asking a question.
YOU said, legitimate + fake = online. I asked to which you applied the answer and you said online. Now you are saying it doesn’t?
So, do we agree that legitimate casinos don’t rig games?
Also, you mentioned taking a cut to help laundering money, now you are retracting saying “are exposed”. No dude, taking a cut has intentionality behind, being exposed is a natural risk for any business which moves money. You claimed the first.
You have defined legitimate casinos as ones that don’t rig games.
I didn’t define shit, you defined legitimate casino as a partition of online casino.
Look what triple jump you are making to avoid saying a very simple thing: legitimate casinos, defined as YOU did (established businesses in the casino industry) don’t rig games.
All because you can’t admit to be wrong :)
So, I will ask once again:
do legitimate casinos, as in YOUR definition, rig games, according to you?
Yes or no question.
Yes. Not necessarily knowingly. Income from internet gambling is tainted.
I would argue with this point, but I won’t. It doesn’t matter, I accept the theoretical possibility of money laundering. For some reason I was mistakenly taking the top comment of this thread as your comment. I even quoted it several times and you didn’t note that that’s not your comment… my bad.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)
Rules:
Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
No NSFW content.
Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.
I am making an example to prove a point. The point is simple “industry” doesn’t contain the scammers who try to abuse it.
Genius take!
Answer the question, though. I repost it for your own convenience. We clear out all the bullshit semantic you brought up, and go straight to the point:
Let’s pretend you actually believe your bs, and let’s make a distinction:
To which ones do you think your initial answer applies:
?
It does. To illustrate this I linked to a bank website containing advice on combating phishing.
Here’s the definition I’m happy with.
Legitimate casinos = established businesses in the casino industry
Fake casinos = scammers
Online casinos = legitimate casinos + fake casinos
Combined because users find it hard to tell the difference.
Answer the question, your definition doesn’t add much.
To which ones does your initial answer apply? Both legitimate and fake casinos?
It’s not a hard question.
P.s. I bet you wouldn’t be able to show me a fake casino if I asked. That’s because they are not a common problem. You are overinflating it to make your absurd definition more reasonable. But let’s not get into this…
Online casinos.
https://www.askgamblers.com/online-casinos/blacklisted
So both legitimate and fake? In other words you believe that both legitimate and fake casinos rig games, both help laundering money and both fight against regulations?
It’s a simple question, show a tiny bit of good faith :)
P.s., have you read your own link?
The blacklisting reasons have to do with scammy customer support, lack of license, stealing money. They don’t even mention rigging games or laundering money, which is what you claimed :)
Your definition of “legitimate casino” excludes any casinos that rig games.
All businesses with financial operations are exposed to money laundering to some degree.
Regulations increase costs to implement. Only “legitimate casinos” fight them.
It’s YOUR definition ahahah I literally took what you said and I am asking a question.
YOU said, legitimate + fake = online. I asked to which you applied the answer and you said online. Now you are saying it doesn’t?
So, do we agree that legitimate casinos don’t rig games?
Also, you mentioned taking a cut to help laundering money, now you are retracting saying “are exposed”. No dude, taking a cut has intentionality behind, being exposed is a natural risk for any business which moves money. You claimed the first.
So, one last time:
Nope. It’s you who is obsessed with separation of “legitimate casinos”.
Correct
Incorrect.
You have defined legitimate casinos as ones that don’t rig games.
Incorrect. I said casinos are used to launder money.
No retraction necessary.
Online casinos rig games. You have defined legitimate casinos as ones that don’t rig games. A normal internet user cannot tell the difference.
Yes. Not necessarily knowingly. Income from internet gambling is tainted.
Your quote:
You forgot already? A link to your own comment.
I didn’t define shit, you defined legitimate casino as a partition of online casino.
Look what triple jump you are making to avoid saying a very simple thing: legitimate casinos, defined as YOU did (established businesses in the casino industry) don’t rig games. All because you can’t admit to be wrong :)
So, I will ask once again:
Yes or no question.
I would argue with this point, but I won’t. It doesn’t matter, I accept the theoretical possibility of money laundering. For some reason I was mistakenly taking the top comment of this thread as your comment. I even quoted it several times and you didn’t note that that’s not your comment… my bad.