This is why a big room (in this post Corona era) should have "both" live dealer tables and electronic tables.

Those worried about bent/marked cards and unscrupulous/incompetent/rude dealers could play on the digital tables and those worried about a rigged tables could play on live dealer tables.

Also those people who want to lessen the chances of getting a virus from cards and chips could go to the digital tables.

Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware

Inserting one word in the above post makes all subsequent posts by all parties indisputable....with the exception of the mersenne twister RNG (I had to look that one up). My only comment on that is there is no such thing as genuine randomness in this universe (including quantam physics).

Unscrupulous, incompetent, and rude ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OU4ZhZc5Zw

Bet your prospective poker palace won't tolerate such guff from its dealers, eh ?

well some of Well Read Ted's posts are genuinely random.

seriously though you are correct in no true random.

I wish I could find this article I read years back. It talked about the randomness in a hand shuffled deck, one from a shuffler and one from computer RNG.

What I rem from the article is the discussion about what "level" of randomness was needed to deal a game of cards (like poker)

Hand Shuffled was something like 1000x more random that what was required. Shufffler was 10,000 and RNG 100,000 (or something like that I am pulling numbers from memory but they were all in that range)


Net net . all forms of randomizing cards for poker are WAY WAY WAY more random that what would be required for a "fair game"

funny

Gzesh ... King of Comment Supporting Video Content

So, basically nothing can be contradicted, since everything someone says is a construct of what's in their mind. No objective reality. Ok.

Well, no. According to him, the things he says are a construct of his mind, and can therefore neither be considered correct nor incorrect objectively. One can only agree or disagree with whatever his mind constructs. So, I agree that he almost always thinks he's right and you agree with him most of the time. Even I would not dare dispute that.

The objective reality of how PTLou states how he groups people is exactly what he states it is. How can you contradict that? It’s amazing that you are not able to understand this. I guess you also have the same trouble differentiating the difference between facts and opinions.

Not going to continue this conversation with someone who isn’t capable of saying, “Oh, I see what you’re saying.” Once you state something, just stick with it no matter how idiotic you sound. That’s how you win the internet.

I think this will attract a lot of poker players when it reopens. From watching the main event , people covering their mouth, wearing hoodies and masks are just what every poker player likes to do.

Against my better judgement as more often than not I'm going to be wrong but here goes.....I think you two are arguing about different but related points.

I read Eponymous to be saying one cannot dispute the simple fact that a person makes a comparison of two items (regardless of whether the comparison is true, untrue, ridiculous, etc). I do not think Eponymous is making a judgement regarding the validity of the comparison itself, only that a person has an unquestionable right to make any comparison they want.

Because of the way things were worded I believe Akashenk is under the impression Eponymous is making the point that when a person chooses to compare two items the validity of the comparison itself cannot be called into question. I understand this reaction as it drives me nuts when I hear someone make an argument that ones "personal" truth cannot be questioned when it is patently false. It usually goes along the lines of "their" truth is subject to their reality and therefore it cannot be judged from an objective point of view yada yada yada.

Disclaimer: neither myself, spouse, kids or dog will be held liable if my post incorrectly interpreted either position.

I think you're more or less correct, at least about my side of it. The issue is not so much about how one views the world. Its about how one applies their view in an inconsistent manner, usually as a result of their own biases.

Person A says they believe that money is the root of all evil. Person B replies, oh, so you must also believe that cotton plants have feelings. Person C interjects, "wait a minute, those two things don't have much in common. You're wrong." And person D chimes in... "you can't say that, because.... reasons." But of course, the reasons given to question the legitimacy of Person B's comments could easily be used to question Person A's comments. And so, no one really has any legitimacy to anything they say.

'Round and round we go.

This is very much up for dispute and hardly settled science.

https://www.quantamagazine.org/does-...math-20200407/

Everything is up for dispute but that does not make an ultimate truth untruthful. Unfortunately science became political long before any of us were here. The idea of "settled science" has become a joke. When a scientific outcome does not fit a narrative one simply theorizes an alternative similar to what this guy did in the article you linked....and of course his half baked theory has no science to back it up but yeah let's roll with it and throw Einstein out the window.

So basically we're creating meat shortages because a bunch of people who for the most part will experience flu-like symptoms and a potential death rate of around 0.2% are scared to go to work.

Unless that place is almost entirely employed by geriatrics I call shenanigans on these policies. Somebody is not actually doing risk/reward analysis or something because these decisions are ******ed.

Edit: I guess 1 in 500 infected people is significant, I guess? I actually don't think it is, but maybe that's just me.

If this place is actually that important for meat production, then why don't they set up a makeshift camp, give workers the option to work or not, and pay the people who work the difference but you can't leave until the end of your contract or whatever it is. Surely that's better than, "well I guess we're shutting it down nothing else we can do. LET THE PEASANTS EAT CAKE HAHAHA"

There's a certain type of person out there who is virtually invulnerable to COVID-19 from a mortality perspective. There's a lot of them. They're on the younger end of the spectrum with a clean bill of health and maybe a couple other factors. If the "age of pandemic/we're all kafkafuqed" rhetoric continues indefinitely I'm pretty sure these people are going to be the new middle/upper-middle class earners in the strange new economy that emerges out of this.

Of course certain other types of people will be unfairly discriminated against for reasons that may not make the most sense but then again nothing really makes a ton of sense because we're all kafkafuqed.

Edit: Ponyboys need not apply.

There were 350 or so cases from that one plant last I heard..... This reads like something out of Upton Sinclar's The Jungle (1906)

The company itself, Smithfield, did not practice any social distancing in the workplace. You think you would eat something coming from that plant ?

One of Alexandre Dreyfus' companies is working on an immunity pass to get folks back into sporting events.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/chili...-football-fans

If sports are played in a glass cube, it could help slow down the spread.

Since you're waxing economics on this, consider that "capital" will never catch CoVid 19 , only workers can catch it.

Especially if no one cares to watch, like last time we saw the Cube.

Good sir I don't wax anything I'm a very hairy man.

I clumsily was trying to make the suggestion that we gather together those who don't care about getting sick every now and then (and for all practical purposes will only get sick and that's it), pay them a more than fair wage to deal with it, and put them in the positions where we would all enjoy the minimum interruptions.

And if that means contracts and camps well that's why we pay them hte moneys.

Well done for getting the point.

This is classic Alex Dreyfus, combining a tech buzzword with wealthy partners' possible money on an idea full of real holes....

"Alexandre Dreyfus, the CEO of Chiliz, told Cointelegraph that Socios Pass is a way to be prepared if governments decide to institute immunity passports despite all criticism.

The fact that it is blockchain-based would help alleviate concerns of data privacy, he argued"

I've known Alex for a few years,from his early online poker days (Chilipoker). He has a ton of ideas, manages to raise a ton of capital to fund them. Seriously, the guy is genius, up to a point. He is capable of pulling off deals like almost no one else I've known or read of.

The proposed model, of sending blockchain based information, with no privacy concerns, all the way to the security guard at the soccer stadium gate, to perform some ID check is not much of a realistic plan. What it does do is blend in the "blockchain" buzzword with raising funding.

Alex might as well propose licensing a chain of "Chiliz blockchain tattoo parlors" to "certify" that a person who sports a Chiliz Tattoo is certified CoVid-free, with his soccer investors just providing seed money and a test application. The potential market goes way beyond even athletic events ....

And this is how racquetball became the most watched sporting event on television this summer!

Consider how long it was going on for before anyone knew. Consider how much "contaminated product" got out and was handled by how many different hands before they went to the store to pick up a few things and touched a bunch of fruit and then went home to their SO and kids.

Meanwhile that package of bacon is still sitting in the fridge in the truck, at the store, or wherever, with all of the rest of the meat being stored with it is.

There's a level where it's all stupid and futile, and another level where if you plug major gaps (whether they're medical or economical gaps) it actually adds value to society.