Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design Subject: Re: OT: Cracking Speech by JDV! Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 16:40:17 +0000 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 59 Message-ID: References: <1r7w9dm.1vd6xpc1u7k344N%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> <1r7xzwp.1mekoh018417ggN%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> <1r7y69b.114wewis5oi0wN%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> <67b54a8a$19$17$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> <1r7zxdv.5r647dfrubyyN%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> <1r80m0g.jmu2nut6jb5dN%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> <1r80nat.u9xef6rookiqN%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> <1r823hi.crga0z790h06N%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 17:40:20 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b623912e22742aa8f5c748f9e422a973"; logging-data="3045338"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+lRc/MU5Uej4Q55gFIpLvYkrAXJuThn//z6c1YdDHuaA==" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:be43NhRzxH8Naakxc8UkxJBE4F8= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-GB Bytes: 4797 On 20/02/2025 14:15, Don Y wrote: > On 2/20/2025 6:50 AM, Liz Tuddenham wrote: >> Don Y wrote: >> >>> [I had an argument, this morning, with a friend who frequents the >>> casinoes.  He was claiming that he was "due" for a win -- a BIG win! >>> He was absolutely clueless about the idea that the machines don't >>> remember his losses -- so, how could they be "ready" to reward him?] >> >> As children we were paid pocket money to play fruit machines.  They were >> owned by my grandfather's business and he needed to know what odds were >> actually coming up, rather then the theoretical odds which might have >> been miscalculated. > > Surprisingly, many people don't understand "odds" vs. "probabilities". > I was hired to make some modifications to a gaming machine and, as > a matter of course, "checked the math" on the "return" calculations > and discovered the stated "odds" were not being fairly implemented > in the code (and, the error was in the players' favor!). Back in my youth I knew a few types of electro mechanical slot machines where the loneliness timeout changed the odds sufficiently in favour of a decent payout that I would play only after I had seen them unplayed for that time. Walking away immediately after winning is the key. >> This meant that, at a very early age, we were all familiar with the >> concepts of chance and had no illusions about it.  The result was that >> none of us had the slightest inclination to start gambling. > > There must be SOME appeal to it as it is such a common exercise. > I think it allows people to THINK they can beat it (esp things > like sports betting). There were one or two games that had a sufficient element of skill and judgement involved "Penny Falls" being the most common one that I could make a handsome profit on the 6 coins I started out with. I wouldn't play at all unless I was pretty sure I could win more by doing so. Apparently called "Coin Pushers" in America I prefer the British name. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coin_pusher#History The only problem was the sheer weight of 1" 1p copper coins (back in the good old days when currency was made of valuable non-ferrous metal). > Amusing to think that they are naive enough to think someone would > create a product that can be "beaten" -- given that such an > event would come at their expense! > > [Of course, there are many ways to "beat" a machine -- but this > is done by exploiting weaknesses in the design, not the algorithms] Some had weaknesses in both. I only played machines where I knew there was a weakness. Modern all electronic ones are much harder to beat and I don't bother trying. Pub Quiz machines were another favourite target. -- Martin Brown