RGP all in a tizzy

2Tone · #1 11-19-04, 02:28 PM

for a change

The current issue is over Party's apparent ability to take screen shots of your desktop to prevent uses of bots.

Personally, I'm glad they are taking measures to prevent the use of bots, but it does seem intrusive if indeed they actually can and are taking captures of my desktop, on which I could have plenty of other material.

Does anyone have reliable info on whether they can and/or are doing this, and if so if it something I should worry about, assuming I'm not using bots?

BlibbityBlabbity · #2 11-19-04, 02:31 PM

I don't care what there purpose is, that can't be legal.

ChipFish · #3 11-19-04, 04:04 PM

It is when you are based offshore and don't have to answer to anyone.

Aequitas58 · #4 11-19-04, 04:12 PM

Correct. Although it seems like an invasion of privacy, which is a direct violation of your fundamental rights granted by the US Constitution, Party wins for two reasons:

(i) They are based offsure, and thus do not have to comply w/ US laws...
and
(ii) By playing on PartyPoker, the users probably had to accept said intrusion when s/he agreed to the license agreement (upon installation).

I have arguments which attack these defenses if anyone wants to hear them!!

ChipFish · #5 11-19-04, 04:28 PM

I would like to hear the prosecutions arguements if you are bored and want to type them out.

However, I do believe that collection of any fine would be virtually impossible, unless partypoker was to voluntarily pay such fines (I highly doubt this).
Who would enforce it?

Aequitas58 · #6 11-19-04, 07:07 PM

I'm about to go watch a movie with the girlfriend, so this won't be as good as I previously imaged due to my time limitations...

The "prosecutions" arguments would be brought by the US Attorney General - which was formerly, John Ashcroft. I don't know who replaced him. Basically, here are my two arguments:

Re: "Invasion of privacy, but too bad since we're offshore..."
This is a strong argument for them, but US can counter by saying something to the extent of: You as an entity and corporation, which is formed out of the sole purpose of making money, is intentionally and flagrantly violating the privacy rights of OUR citizens, and even though you are not controlled by the laws on this national jurisdiction, we have a problem with you screwing with our citizens.

Re: "PartyPoker claims that you accepted the terms upon installation."
Did you know what you were clicking when you clicked "accept?" Was the authorization to obtain graphical copies of PartyPoker user's desktops buried in PartyPokers EULA biolerplate? Was the language of authorization comprehendable to the "average" citizen, or does it take a specialized or detailed knowledge to even READ the EULA?

Another possible argument:
PartyPoker advertises their product on United States televisions nationwide. Are they somehow accepting liability via provisions of the UCC because they are advertising to American citizens.

That's about it for now. The arguments can get more detailed and even branch off with some more time.

Talking Poker · #7 11-19-04, 07:36 PM

I find this all very, very interesting. I had never even heard of WinHoldEm until this thread. How does it work, and more importantly, how WELL does it work? I have trouble believing a bot could play better than I could (not to sound too cocky), but even if it plays well enough to consistently win, that's pretty nice. You could run it 24/7 and clean up.

2Tone · #8 11-19-04, 07:48 PM

The questions are …

1) How well they play
Lots and lots of debate over this. The general consensus seems to be that they play fairly well, but that a good player should be able to beat them. But that they can clean up at looser low limits, just by playing by-the-book poker.

2) How good the sites are at stopping them
Even more debate about this one. If 10 bots sit at a table and take each other’s money all night, what do the sites care? They make rake no matter who – or what – wins. Still, it seems they do make a legitimate effort to combat bots, as evidence by what kicked off this thread.

Talking Poker · #9 11-19-04, 08:11 PM

I really find this fascinating. Personally, I wouldn't mind sitting at a table full of bots, because I think I could take them... but I haven't actually seen one in action yet. But, based on the terrible play I see online constantly, I would think the bots could be quite successful by just playing mechanically - nothing fancy.

Does anyone have any solid Poker Tracker numbers from a significant sample of hands played by the bot? I wonder at what limit the BBs/hr starts to really drop and at what level the bot actually becomes a loser, if any.

As for the sites' defense against the bots, I am NOT a fan of them taking screen shots of my computer while I'm playing. What if I have (any kind of) sensitive info on the screen at the time? That's not cool at all.

junYUN · #10 11-19-04, 08:44 PM

whoa, bots that play for you? that's nuts. i would never EVER trust a bot with my bankroll, however. i don't think it's that big of a deal taking a screen shot, it's not like they're "invading" your privacy, they're simply doing exactly what you authorized them to do by installing their software. they're trying to prevent cheating, trying to keep the playing field level. it's not like they're searching your computer and deleting/adding things.

Talking Poker · #11 11-19-04, 09:11 PM

How do you know?

And if they take a screen shot of your bank account information? You have no problem with this? Sure, THEY may not use it maliciously, but anyone who gets their hands on that file.... I don't know. Seems like a bad idea to me.

Frontin · #12 11-19-04, 09:39 PM

On the winholdem forum site there's a section with a few threads on team hold'em. One guy even said something like I have a few friends who I would like to play team hold'em with... it's one thing to have a bot play for you, but for a team of bots??!?!?!! WTF!!!???!!!

Talking Poker · #13 11-19-04, 10:27 PM

No kidding. If nothing else, this is a red flag to be careful when you're playing online...

Chutups · #14 11-19-04, 10:37 PM

I knew it wouldn't take a lot of time until someone made somthing like this, kind of scary you could be playing a table full of bots.

drewjax · #15 11-20-04, 12:06 AM

Is there only talk of this taking place only on Party, and not other sites.

Talking Poker · #16 11-20-04, 12:29 AM

Honestly, I'm not worried about it at all. A bot is only as good as the person who programmed it - it can't learn, it has to follow set rules, it can't adapt to the "feel" of the game, and it doesn't remember what happened the previous hand. Given all that, I STILL think it could make money by just playing half decent poker online, but I'll take my chances with a room full of them any day.

johnbaker · #17 11-20-04, 01:41 AM

cheatnig in all its forms should be prevented, i dont mind if partypoker takes screenshots of my desktop if it will prevent bot users from running around on partypoker fucking up a game of skill and turning it solely into a game of statistics.

-jB

ChipFish · #18 11-20-04, 11:35 AM

Thanks, I always find stuff like this interesting....
However, with this arguement there is a problem...
From what I have heard (And I could be wrong) Advertising for poker sites is "ILLEGAL" in the states. The IRS (or whoever) can confiscate the money from whichever media outlet accepted and played the advertisement.

Therefore Partypoker (and some others I hear) have gotten around this by advertising a website that merely "has links" to party poker on it. This is a "Poker School" that they are advertising

Since they are not actually advertising their product (online gambling), they are not accepting any U.S. Liability through the provisions of the UCC (Which I am not aware what this is... I am Canadian so some of these things I just have to guess at).

Aequitas58 · #19 11-20-04, 03:09 PM

UCC - Unified Commerical Code. Think: the rules / regulations of buying and selling things, leasing things, secured transactions, contract law, etc etc etc.

Aequitas58 · #20 11-20-04, 03:14 PM

I disagree.

I feel like the chessplayers were the first group of people to use this argument... I do agree that in the initial stages, you CAN beat the computer - it's only a machine. But you won't be able to beat the machine once it gets better. It will stop making mistakes. You, on the other hand, will make mistakes. You can/will go on tilt. The computer won't.

Not discrediting any of your poker talent, I just think the best machine will eventually be able to beat the best player.

Ask Gary Kasparov.

Talking Poker · #21 11-20-04, 04:01 PM

You are comparing chess with poker. And you just can't do that. These are two very, very, very different games.

If and when AI takes big steps forward, sure, a bot may be able to play very, very, very good poker against it's opponents. But I think we're years and years away from that kind of technology.

Take the tournament of Champions show on ESPN for example. Sit a bot at that table instead of Raymer... it's not going to win. It wouldn't stand a chance.

You say the bot won't make mistakes and I will, but this is where I disagree with you. Hold'Em is a game where sometimes "mistakes" aren't mistakes. If the bot plays "flawlessly" by always putting it's money in when it believes it has a mathematical edge, than that's it's weakness and could be easily exploited by a half decent player.

"Eventually?" Maybe. But now? No way.

Aequitas58 · #22 11-20-04, 04:47 PM

A bot can't win the TOC, yet Annie Duke can?? COME ON!

I know what you're saying, and it is a weak comparison, but I think it applies. Agree to disagree.

Tilter · #23 11-20-04, 06:17 PM

Wow, spyware taken to the next level. Now I got to be careful when I am entering privy info.

hackers238 · #24 11-21-04, 02:21 AM

I think most people are naive to the advances in the past decadein AI. It is not at all difficult to remember past hands, and do opponent mapping for every opponent ever played against using a feed-forward neural network. I think that bots could become much better poker players than the best, if some serious study was done into what makes a poker player truly great.

If used correctly, computers could take over the poker world in only a few short years.

PShabi · #25 11-21-04, 09:47 AM

I'm starting to wonder if I've played at a table with some bots on party. Seriously. Lately, while multitabling, I've found some really tight low limit tables at 1/2 and even 2/4. With like people folding to the button regularly and overall really tight play that I just never, ever, ever saw when playing strictly pacific. I moved to Party and found a lot more players, so I naturally think, more players, more loose playing idiots. Not the case so far in about 3 weeks there. But I'm cleaning up so I'm with TP. Bring on the bots!