Washington is one of the few states that doesn’t allow employers to pay below minimum wage even to tipped employees. Maybe Seattle is different since its city minimum wage is above the state minimum, but those Seattle waiters aren’t making $3 or whatever pre-tip.
I highly recommend his policenauts play through for anyone who reads this site. He talks a lot about the romhacking process (the game had no English version until he helped patch it in)
Gambling games are bad for the exact same reasons that grind-based are bad: people play them for the addictive reward mechanisms. If you're not affected by those mechanisms, you're usually left with garbage.
Variable rewards are also the reason why poker is one of the few games with a heavy skill component that can move large amounts of money directly between players; few people are willing to be a sucker. So losing players have to either get something else from the experience, or be convinced that they aren't losing players.
I said elsewhere in this thread that skill-based vs. luck based is a continuum. The most popular poker games tend to land on the sweet spot where "enough luck that bad players can think they're good" and "enough skill that you can actually be good" meet.
>Gambling games are bad for the exact same reasons that grind-based are bad: people play them for the addictive reward mechanisms. If you're not affected by those mechanisms, you're usually left with garbage.
Wouldn't these games be even more appealing if had the same reward mechanisms but were also intrinsically interesting?
>The most popular poker games tend to land on the sweet spot where "enough luck that bad players can think they're good" and "enough skill that you can actually be good" meet.
You'd think you'd see games along this continuum but poker is alone in the sweet spot. The other casino games aren't even worth considering.
If it's company policy, the employees have plenty of incentive to snitch to gaming boards. I used to hang out with a lot of casino dealers in Washington state and every one of them would sell out their boss that day if they were told to do something like this.
You would think so. But I assure you, it occurs. It may be more the dealers themselves with the "casino" turning a blind eye. Maybe they themselves would face suspension of their licenses. Maybe ratting out a casino is not a good idea *looks over shoulder. I don't know.
> It may be more the dealers themselves with the "casino" turning a blind eye.
That strikes me as even less likely. Given that dealers are tipped from winning players, they wouldn't want to cheat in the house's favor unless they're also pocketing the extra winnings. This is the equivalent of overcharging customers and then skimming from the register, except the store's surveillance is better than most.
FWIW, the one instance I have first-hand knowledge of someone being ratted out, it was the casino's owner. She asked a surveillance employee to destroy a tape and he sent it to the state Gaming Commission instead.
Ya, I don't know. I'm just relating what I've observed. And I spent a lot of time doing this observing. It was a sort of "second job" for a number of years. Probably more years than most people who post here have been able to drink beer. I know the game intimately and I have watched dealers who could point the ball where they wanted and watched the table bump scam. I guess I understand people being incredulous. I might be as well if I were not an "expert" on this particular topic. And I don't say expert proudly but rather with a bit of shame on a lot of wasted time and effort (although I am "up" in roulette it is hardly enough to account for these hours, and I am just as equally if not more "down" in other things. I tried to beat slots also with no luck. And of course poker which was probably about a wash and took a lot of time.) But... it did give me a new perspective on randomness. I think there is a lot less of "randomness" and a lot more of "patterns we don't perceive" in the world.
> But if someone choose to go all-in blind pre-flop then they are choosing to play the game as pure gambling and their version of the game would be pure chance.
This isn't making the game pure chance; it's just cutting off that player from future decisions. The opponents still get to call or fold, which means the opponent is manipulating the odds that the all-in player will win a contested pot.
"Game of skill" vs. "game of luck" is not a binary distinction, but the law pretends it is. I think it's definitely closer to the "skill" end of the continuum than the "luck" end though.
Large companies tend to err on the side of taking down more than they legally "have to". I know of YouTube videos that were taken down because of copyright claims that were outright false (that is, the entity making the claim didn't even have any rights to the material that was allegedly being infringed). There's a lot of room to be more lenient than YT and still on the right side of the law.
Yeah, and for that matter "fundamentalism" has been associated with certain elements of the Christian right (like biblical literalism) at least since the 90's.
In fact, if someone were to use the term 'fundamentalism' in any other way I'd be a bit annoyed at them for obfuscating the conversation by using a word in a non-idiomatic fashion.
https://www.lni.wa.gov/WorkplaceRights/Wages/Minimum/