Kobayashi Maru Test that young Capt Kirk gamed to graduate from the academy. yes the rules can be changed on any game.

Kirk surmised there was no way for him to win on current path so changed the rules.

Projects coming out now think they can win on current path.

I'd agree with you, little or no way for current projects to win. assuming win means build a successful online poker business. they need to change the rules with some of the concepts you are bringing forward.


yes they are.. each with their own self interests. again zero sum game to them.

I'd be SHOCKED if they are not reading this thread.

Recent ico's have gathered millions if not billions. But I've already seen poker projects flop and I think its because they offere inferior solutions and also that the long past ico's have insider money being pumped into them (ie someone gets rich in bitcoin and creates an etherem project and puts a small fortune into it and so do their friends). I think organically these sales for poker sites will only attract $100k's at most and that isn't enough probably to recoup their start costs. Certainly not enough to mass market.

Changing a game from zero sum to not zero sum does not change the assumption that all parties are acting self interested. In fact this is always the assumption, the solution must rely on it to be stable and secure. And you need great stability and security in order to invoke the great energy needed to change to a higher equilibrium.

I KNOW some are. More to the point, if they are informed and up to date on this dialogue and they aren't participating, how does that look on them? There is a different kind of pressure that is arising. The players are gaining leverage daily. Leverage they desperately needing in the two major boycott events they had. I think this is a situation is very relatable to game theory and so having thought leaders, ie really good poker players, getting up to date and participating could really have a changing effect in the short term.

Great. So answer the first part of my question, "Are any of them willing to code it"?

In other words, do you have coders willing to do it for free or are you just spamming this thread with wishful thinking?

Well Estonia has given up its right to issue currency altogether. If anything the article is positive for recognition of crypto because Draghi is saying "Yes, 'currency' includes crypto so you can't do it" - doesn't mean he's against the ECB doing it.

I don't have a list. Patrick has been coding for free for 4 years. Bitcoin devs have created a $120 billion vault of wealth that is the leading computer science project in the world for free. The browser I am using was coded for free. I think this isn't your domain of expertise. All you do is design a project, make it modular, put it in a project management system like git/github, and attract hobbyists. Its not at all spam or wishful thinking. Its perfectly reasonably. I don't understand your contention?

And if there is mutual benefit and cost reduction and projects that would benefit would also want to contribute. We aren't talking 100's of developers, we are talking a small handful. I would expect it to be led by Patrick. But it could be any small group. I guarantee their would be many volunteers from this forum alone.

I just can't help but feel you are familiar with the open source model, especially bitcoin's model. It's perfectly standard and tried, tested, true etc.

Edit: I also think in regard to "spam" that this dialogue would be quite different with actual "thought leaders" that are in a position to attach emerging projects to such a movement. From a player perspective a group development might seem daunting, but from a current project that is trying to solve the problem of emergence and player acquisition a coalition might seem to involve less energy than their current strategy options.

just message chicago joey and ask him for a podcast where you explain your idea

I don't think he would understand the significance and so it would seem like spam. It all depends on ones understanding of crypto, and not just as an involvement but also the underlying tech. I think more evolution probably is needed and just general dialogue on the subject.

sick dig on joey, brah

You keep implying I'm guessing

I thought about this, and I think I might understand your feelings on this and rearrange your question as "Why hasn't this been done?" That could be a useful question.

The response would be that projects are TRYING to do this, they are trying to build the new model but they cannot properly grasp the new paradigm. The old model is intrinsic in their present day attempts, and this is true with a good half a dozen to a dozen projects I have looked at (some have failed and broken up already and its difficult to tell if they are now a part of new present day offerings/projects (but some did take investment and fail)).

cmon just text him. i think it will work.

Who is Patrick? I thought I'd missed him being introduced but having searched the thread people just start talking about him using his first name on the assumption we know who it is, in the same way we might say "Donald", "Hilary", "Boris" or in poker "Doyle" assuming people know.

totally agree.. Cmon Joey or Doug (ties into your crypto biz, yo)

get the noose on.

the thread will help develop some relevant questions for the podcast thingy format.

maybe get Rast or Coleman on as well to talk about virtue poker.

Now I know why you keep asking me if I have a team in mind to "build" the protocol, and keep accusing me of spam. Patrick built the protocol (proof of concept etc.) I'm referring to that you keep asking how many people it would take to build, and keep asserting that no one will work on it for free. Of course we could use an such protocol or project. He's just the only one with the paradigm that doesn't intrinsically have the old centralized model baked in.

Yup I'm sure he will get rast or coleman or Josem. And none of these people have a clue what they are talking about on this subject.

It didn't work. I keep saying reasonable things like he'll just think its spam and ya'll keep asserting I'm not correct

Is Patrick (weird how he doesn't have a surname but ok) going to code some software that uses this protocol or is doing that so last century?

from earlier ITT Lektor

A) it’s really unproductive and unhelpful to falsely ascribe motivations to other people, like you’ve done here.

B) I’m currently on my way home after a week in various remote parts of Scotland where internet has been intermittent and unreliable. While I’m happy to participate in a discussion with y’all in due course, give me until the end of the week to catch up and get up to speed on it all.

Cheers.

So I think it's not unlikely that a discussion for a coalition of operators and movement involving also the players could form.

I think it's obvious that someone like Joey would probably be more interested and comfortable talk with Josem (whether Josem understands the new paradigm or not is another question).

I cant argue with that. My bad and apologies. Though, lets not forget this is NVG. Right or wrong, many many posts and entire threads do exactly what you suggest. I'm just trying to fit in

More importantly, the conversation is good for the industry. Even sites that already locked in on strategy might benefit. Maybe there are better ways. Maybe its not a strict zero sum game between competing sites.

Whether or not NVG is the best format for said discussions, dunno. But its the only one I know of for the moment.

Stating the obvious here I know but whichever technology is the future, it needs to become a worldwide game again to grow. Segregating into separate countries and states is killing it off. I remember Norman Chad and Antonio discussing in the wsop commentary how they would be having record numbers attend now at the wsop if the online game was to come back so its damaged the live game too (well tournaments at least). It needs the big companies in poker/software/casinos and governments to work together in some way to make it a worldwide game again. Easier said than done though I know but i'm sure it would be worth their while financially and definitely great for poker.

lol @ Norman Chad as an authority on anything outside of his schtick:

"His biggest comic theme in both sportswriting and poker commentary is his frequent references to his 'failed marriages'. In his weekly syndicated column on July 29, 2007, Chad announced that he has married for a third time and has started a new 'perilous life'.[3] He is also noted for his strong dislike of what he terms "showboating in poker", especially by people such as Phil Hellmuth, Josh Arieh, Mike Matusow, and many others. He has regularly made numerous (presumably unpaid) references to his beer preference, which has switched from Rolling Rock to Pabst Blue Ribbon to Yuengling. His poker commentary often includes terms such as "squadoosh" (zero/nothing, e.g., a weak hand) and "whamboozled" (to be knocked out of a tournament).'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Chad

(To be fair, he has learned to play tournaments over the years.)

after my CoinPoker aha moment last week, and many other new things learned ITT, been digging around to learn more.

Ran across this video. I found it to be very useful in helping me sort out some of the new concepts bouncing around in my head. Presenter hits on some of the more esoteric topics discussed ITT and at least for me, made some easier to understand.

Blockchain vs B.S.

Great. When can we play on it?

when enough smart, interested people begin to collaborate on it, just like Bitcoin.

That is I think thenoose's driving point ITT.

lol @ Norman Chad as an authority on anything


I don't think pointing out one thing that a person mentions is implying that they are an 'authority'.

Andreas is one of the foremost blockchain experts on the planet and is probably responsible for educating more people on the benefits of Bitcoin and blockchain tech than anyone else. I personally got into Bitcoin after listening to Andreas discuss on the Joe Rogan podcast in 2013/14 (whenever his first appearance was).

He has a great way of explaining complicated concepts in non-technical ways, so anyone wanting to learn more about blockchain tech should definitely spend some time watching his videos on YouTube.