The disagreement seems to be with yourself:

So, it's possible that sites could, or they are now? If they are now, how is that working? Is this actual dividends based on currency you own, or is it rakeback, which you claimed earlier was the same as dividends?

Breakout poker pays you to hold their coin, so its a dividend and not rakeback for playing. My basic point is that this is what this technology allows for. It is quite easy to set up, and you can make complex algorithms that are not so possible with existing sites.

And effectively it is all the same thing, it is quite in the sites best interests to "share" the wealth in order to solve the "players boycott" problem

Recall the difficulty of getting players to migrate, if the smart players leave, the profitability goes up, and so there is a sticking equilibrium.

But the introduction of a transferable utility changes the game from zero sum to not zero sum. The model bitcoin used to bootstrap is perfectly applicable to poker, and coinpoker for example has implemented it.

These sites will literally pay you to play on them more so than any time before. It is the solution.... the introduction of a "poker currency".

What I meant to post here.

From their white paper:

"Our token will provide increased value for the initial holders of the CHP coins
Holders of CHP post ICO will benefit from an increase in the price of CHP as demand for coins increases.
The only way for any poker fan to play at CoinPoker is to buy coins at market rates. If the site grows, as
outlined above, so will the price of CHP coins, this will result in more utility and use on the platform.

CoinPoker will release 500 million CHIPS (CHP) tokens into the market (see 3. Token Sale) and this amount
will be fixed. Newcomers to the site after ICO, or those who have lost and need to chip up again, will
need to buy additional CHP. To do this, they will need to buy CHP on the exchange from holders of
CHPs looking to cash out, these transactions are done at market rates.

This structure of fixed supply and increasing demand will cause the price of CHP to rise facilitating a significant return-on-investment for early adopters giving them more playing power on the CoinPoker Network.

Here’s simple example: if there’s 1,000 coins in the market spread evenly between 20 players with 50
coins each. Statistically if 5% of poker players are winners in online poker, eventually all the coins will end
up in one player’s wallet. So the remaining 19 players will have to buy additional tokens in order to play
and this demand will increase the value of all tokens."


Clever and lucrative but not total control of

"The health of the CoinPoker Platform and all technical developments are subject to changes in the
interpretation, application and regulation of gaming laws in multiple jurisdictions around the world.
Sudden changes can impact the utility and value of the coin and the health of the CoinPoker network.

Although this document details the CoinPoker Platform and its functionality, the CHP coin is not limited to
use only on this platform. The value of the coin will depend on the health of the platform and the adoption
of its use by the general public, which can be impacted by many factors that are beyond the control of
CoinPoker"

For all intent and purposes, it works just as the dollar used to when it was based on gold. Times were saving money was thoughtful as it would increase in value instead of the today depreciation, with the added benefit of being able to make a more educated guess on its future appreciation, as it is, in essence, a business driven currency.

Also there is no need for dividends if there are capital gains.

This is exactly the insight I am trying to lead us to collectively understand. The free market of competition and the floating exchange price of differing poker sites tokens, brings us to a situation comparable to a gold standard.

Then the price trend of the tokens reflects the underlying otherwise hidden effective rake, creating a signal for players to identify which are the trustworthy sites to play on.

It is this signal the players need to bring profitability back to the games and to bring down the de facto monopoly that killed them.

Awareness to this concept, will set the movement towards it on fire. When a few established and influential regs understand it.

Maybe I'm missing something, or picking at nits because the overall concept is the best thing since sliced bread, but there is something that seems to be missing in all of this macro conversation about cryptocurrency, the poker economy and both servers and players in places all over the world.

If this is decentralized, who is in charge of the little details that make a poker site work? What authority grants the license, or will that even matter? If I think that I see collusion or multi-accounting, to whom do I send my report?

Perhaps most important, will this in any way affect government regulation? Keep in mind that playing online is a felony in the state of Washington.

It was not I who put words in your mouth it was this guy.

On a more serious note...

The day of the reg is over, and has been for some time and is not coming back.

The technical solutions you discuss are very interesting but more from a theoretical standpoint, but will likely not change anything in practice.

Any technology that does come forward will be focused on maximizing profit, vs catering to the wants and needs of regs.

Regs and sites are in competition for the same rec buyins... always have been and always will be.

In boom boom days, they could co-exist.

That is no longer true. No technology will change that basic market dynamic.

Online poker is online poker is online poker. If it was illegal to play before, decentralizing it doesn't change that, at least not for the player.

I have not shilled anything, but I do counter your nonsense with observational data anyone else can gather by doing a simple search.

fwiw PTLou's insight about regs is accurate, but you will just continue with your ignorance and rhetoric because you have no practical experience.
Go on sucking Szabo's blick until you get a mouth full.

I think time will answer to all of this questions.

Its mostly illegal to serve not to play. You aren't using the word/phrase decentralization in proper context imo.

Which is why I specifically stated "If it was illegal to play before" and "at least not for the player", responding to his example of Washington state, where it is illegal to play.

Sorry, your description and conclusion are both 100% inaccurate.

When BRK, the Breakout coin, was mined, a reserve was created for loans to be made to interested projects utilizing the coin. The loan program and repayment terms are publicly disclosed.

http://www.breakoutcoin.com/coinsale-brx/

Breakout Gaming, is a Malta-based business and Curacao-licensed gaming company, which also runs casino games on a UK licensed network, runs poker freerolls, pays rakeback, and otherwise uses BRK to market its games. Breakout Poker runs on the GG Poker Network.

https://breakoutgaming.com/promotions/

https://breakoutgaming.com/about-breakout-gaming/

The Breakout Gaming games are NOT decentralized, but accept all sorts of deposits, including BRK. Breakout Gaming offers an array of games and options, as well as poker, where permitted.

The BRK coin has a decentralized blockchain, on which run transactions in the BRK coin, and powered by Proof of Stake. It trades every day on Bittrex, among other exchanges.

You quoted me saying they pay a dividend to stake holders and it is 100% accurate and not incorrect. You need to retract your statement that I am inaccurate here.

The relevant point is that if a p2p protocol is developed then there is no operator, so in place where it is illegal for an operator but not for the player this would change the landscape. Its difficult for a nation like the US to make laws where its illegal to play poker (for the player). It goes against our natural rights. I read no one has been charged in washington ever. So to have a p2p poker etc. it is likely that poker would be legal everywhere. And this is conducive to the history of poker in relation to law. Gambling and poker have always ran on the frontier of our exploration and expansion.

Great. Thanks for sharing. However, I was responding to the question being asked about whether decentralization changes anything in respect to laws against people being allowed to play online poker, which it doesn't.

If you want to post your own response to Poker Clif about how decentralization will cause those laws to change over a period of several years, then go ahead and do so, rather than replying to my post to try and correct me on...I don't know what.

You are totally clueless.

maybe more totally idealistic than totally clueless.

The "does p2p make online poker legal" discussion was fully hashed out much earlier in thread. Most agreed, than in practice it does not. I hope we dont have to rehash that entire discussion.

These new technologies are going to open up all sorts of new business models.

I have been thinking about nooses sub-thread ITT about CHPs being some form of equity. Though we got caught up in semantics, I could see business models develop (inside and outside of poker) where those lines are blurred. That opens up all sorts of new potential relationships between company, product, investor/owner, customer.

How / why that could / would / should be applied to online poker, I dunno.

No retraction, you are simply and stubbornly inaccurate.

If you bothered to read the links I posted, you might get that what you have been mistaken about is the Proof of Stake process, which was in effect by creating a separate coin called BRX. BRX and BRK trade separately and independently.

The creation of a transferable stake "license", to approve BRK transaction, using just about any computer instead of a costly, energy draining ASIC rigs, allows anyone owning BRX and a computer to capture the "fees" for staking BRK that BTC awards instead0 capital intensive Proof of Work mining pools.

Staking involves performing a service,just like BTC mining; nothing "dividend" about it. BRX staking seems to return about 17 to 18 %, less the power to leave a laptop running, versus the market price for acquiring BRX.

what if the laptop is already on?

Then that cost factor is already shared with some other tasks. Same with your internet service costs.

These are costs of inputs to perform a service for which a reward is issued, nothing "dividend" about it and is NOT paid out by Breakout Gaming; there is no requirement to hold any BRK at all, or access Breakout Gaming at all, to get staking, only some BRX coins.

btw, it takes VERY little computer capacity to perform proof of stake with BRX; a raspberry pi will suffice, so a dedicated PoS machine may make sense.

That Breakout Gaming poker games/chips are denominated in BRK does not mean anyone has to hold BRK, it is readily cashed out/re-deposited using the BRK blockchain for processing

As soon as I saw this thread I suspected that part of the object was to avoid the government. I say that partly because I've seen people in these forums say that Bitcoin transactions "will be harder to track" and things very similar to that. It is my understanding that Bitcoin transactions leave a paper trail. Also, one person in this thread posted this:

"As for legality, it will be pretty hard to make it illegal due to its decentralised nature."

Another posted said that it would be good for "private home games." You can already do that on some sites.

That is also why I pointed out that in the state of Washington poker is illegal. As you already stated, decentralized poker won't change that. If that is the aim, you just have a high tech version of an illegal home game.

I may be paranoid, but I've seen so much in these forums about using Bitcoin so that you aren't tracked, or on why it's OK to evade taxes, that it doesn't quite smell right to me.

Do I think that the folks behind decentralized poker are good, honest people? Probably. Do a lot of poker players have something else in mind? I think that they do.

Yeah, I'd agree with this. And while I also agree that some see decentralizing as a way to get around online poker laws, that's mostly on the operator side, not so much on the player side. Whether it does so legally, I really couldn't say, and I think it would depend a lot on the law.

The UIGEA, for example, doesn't make online poker illegal - I believe the idea was to make it illegal for financial institutions to send money to/from unregulated poker sites. I'm not knowledgeable enough about these matters to know if using cryptos avoids this problem, or just makes it difficult to enforce, but for some they probably don't care which it is, as long as it means they can play.

I also think there are some who see the decentralization model as having many benefits unrelated to regulation. And of course, some for whom it's mostly, or even entirely, about regulation. Or maybe more to the point, avoiding/evading it.

This man knows his ****. So its not a dividend because it cost your computer power? but you do get paid to hold stake with your computer on.

I don't think it was me. Maybe it was. But generally I don't think this way. Bitcoin is terrible for doing illegal things. Yes it leaves a paper trail. But it also pushes the boundaries and our collective understanding.

Yes this. They have to form law such that it protects our freedoms not takes them away. So they restricted payment processing etc and bitcoin changes that. Over the next few years do you think playing poker online will be more legal or less?

I'm quite certain we will have a global player pool again, and this is what decentralized poker means and it is very important to the world and the world will realize it.