Image Image Image




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 37 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 2:18 am 
Offline
Junior member
User avatar

Posts: 20
Favourite Bot: TBD
Computer security forums often discuss people in terms of white hat, black hat, and grey hat. I think the same applies to development of poker bots. A "white hat" is openly developing poker related software tools or bots, willing to publishing their results, and interested in "legitimate" uses of their tools such as training, research, offline improvement, or bot competitions like the AAAI Computer Poker Competition. If their tools compete against people, it's openly done vs willing humans who knowingly play them. A "black hat" botter is trying to use bots to win money from human competitors who expect to play in a context where using computer assistance is a violation of the terms of service of their site. A "grey hat" has no personal agenda to behave as a black hat, but is willing to trade information with black hats and neither condones nor condemns them. I'm defining goals, not necessarily capabilities as I'm not quite sure how successful the best black hat botters are in practice.

I've joined this forum recently, because I like the discussions of the academic research topics and it seems to be the leading place to discuss topics like game theory and software techniques poker tools with "white hat" uses. I recently referred someone I respect to this site and their reaction was that a lot of content on this site is "dedicated to cheating the game". This disturbed me as the few threads I've participated in have all been completely legitimate and so my first reaction was "huh?". Yet as I look around, I see a some threads on topics that might give that impression.

So being the simpleton that I am, I'm going to come right out and ask what I want to know: where does this site and forum stand on the hat color spectrum? How accepting is this forum to of contributions and topics of interest only to black hat botters? Does the forum tolerate all comers who have skills and techniques relevant to software tools for poker, or is there an expectation that these tools be used according to a high ethical standard.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 2:43 am 
Offline
Senior member
User avatar

Posts: 356
Favourite Bot: OpenHoldem
Quote:
#1 in pokerbotting for REAL money.


Interestingly though, many people on this forum don't care about violating TOS to deploy a bot on a pokersite, I think most people on this forum don't like collusion.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 3:12 am 
Offline
Senior member
User avatar

Posts: 168
Favourite Bot: none
Panik wrote:
Quote:
#1 in pokerbotting for REAL money.


Interestingly though, many people on this forum don't care about violating TOS to deploy a bot on a pokersite, I think most people on this forum don't like collusion.

This is not that surprising. Collusion ruins poker by giving an actual game theoretic advantage to the colluders. Running a bot on the other hand is basically just one step beyond having a HUD. You can debate the ethics of botting, but its hard to argue that botting poses a greater threat to poker than collusion.

As for the OP, I think you will find that people of all types use these forums (there are online botting forums and an antidetection forum, so playing online against the TOS is definitely not condemned...)


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 3:40 am 
Offline
Senior member
User avatar

Posts: 120
Favourite Bot: mine, in writing
--edit


Last edited by sob on Tue Mar 02, 2010 4:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 3:56 am 
Offline
Senior member
User avatar

Posts: 133
Location: Post & Hyde
Favourite Bot: bender bot
Mad scientist hat. I remember somewhere in one of his early papers, the Poki-guy speculated about testing Poki online against humans, for real money. Maybe working out a deal with one of the sites. Now his job is to catch people doing exactly that. Truth is, it's just about impossible to resist.

Writing code that gives rise to behavior and decision making.... it's just plain cool. A while back, I had an issue with some of my AI agents tilting. They've got an adaptive mechanism where they weight 3 fundamental strategies according to how well each has performed in the past. But if they hit a statistically improbable run of bad luck, that'd push the weights too far off in one direction or another. They'd tilt. I also had issues with depression. To run a Monte Carlo sim, the agents need a self-model to supply their own actions during the sim. But if they happen to run into repeated situations requiring them to fold, the self-model starts to say "I fold a lot", and it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. "Since I fold a lot, I might as well save some money and fold now." So they actually do fold, and that confirms the "I fold a lot" hypothesis. A downward depression spiral. "Why even play, what's the point?"

Seriously.... what could be cooler than that?

Online poker is the perfect AI arena -- both the game itself, plus the Turing-test element of deploying your agent in a human environment. But now of course we've got these online players who are vehemently anti-bot. I think the reason they're so neurotic about it is that, as the games have gotten tougher, their CEO salaries have turned into middle-management salaries, and now they're facing down the horror of getting a job. Dropping out of college suddenly seems like a not-so-great decision. I don't lose much sleep. And the big irony... the typical online player uses database software to exploit less sophisticated players. That's where his money comes from. So now he's worried about people coming along with better software -- software they wrote themselves. Exploiter becomes exploitee. It's perfect.
:theboss


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 4:24 am 
Offline
Junior member
User avatar

Posts: 20
Favourite Bot: TBD
Panik wrote:
Quote:
#1 in pokerbotting for REAL money.


I have no problem with someone writing a bot and having it play poker with willing participants for money. Forgive my utter ignorance on this topic... what sites allow this? It is quite another thing to run a bot to play against people who desire to play against humans and rely on the terms of service of a site to define what a fair game is.

Panik wrote:
Interestingly though, while most people on this forum don't care about violating TOS to deploy a bot on a pokersite, I think most people on this forum don't like collusion.


It sounds like many people here are "black hats" using my terminology. That said the http://pokerai.org/pf3/viewtopic.php?f=79&t=1957 says "We are not advising you to break the Terms of Service of any website or service" and discusses examples.

Knowingly violating a contract in order to gain a competitive advantage is fraud against the legitimate players and is a form stealing. This quasi morality that says that one person's violations of the rules of the game are OK but another's are not (collusion) is completely untenable. You either play by the rules or you don't. Regardless of whether using bots on sites that don't allow it is a criminal act, it is clearly an overt act of fraud against the other players who abide by the rules and there is no doubt that you are not legally entitled to ill gotten gains and any court in the world would provide legal remedies if confronted with such facts.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 4:40 am 
Offline
Junior member
User avatar

Posts: 20
Favourite Bot: TBD
Sam_Spade wrote:
Writing code that gives rise to behavior and decision making.... it's just plain cool. A while back, I had an issue with some of my AI agents tilting. They've got an adaptive mechanism where they weight 3 fundamental strategies according to how well each has performed in the past. But if they hit a statistically improbable run of bad luck, that'd push the weights too far off in one direction or another. They'd tilt. I also had issues with depression. To run a Monte Carlo sim, the agents need a self-model to supply their own actions during the sim. But if they happen to run into repeated situations requiring them to fold, the self-model starts to say "I fold a lot", and it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. "Since I fold a lot, I might as well save some money and fold now." So they actually do fold, and that confirms the "I fold a lot" hypothesis. A downward depression spiral. "Why even play, what's the point?"

Seriously.... what could be cooler than that?


That is quite interesting. I don't see why it wouldn't remain interesting in a setting where botting is accepted. So I don't understand your point. The fact that ai is cool has little to do with injecting it into forums where it's not welcome.

Sam_Spade wrote:
Online poker is the perfect AI arena -- both the game itself, plus the Turing-test element of deploying your agent in a human environment. But now of course we've got these online players who are vehemently anti-bot. I think the reason they're so neurotic about it is that, as the games have gotten tougher, their CEO salaries have turned into middle-management salaries, and now they're facing down the horror of getting a job. Dropping out of college suddenly seems like a not-so-great decision. I don't lose much sleep. And the big irony... the typical online player uses database software to exploit less sophisticated players. That's where his money comes from. So now he's worried about people coming along with better software -- software they wrote themselves. Exploiter becomes exploitee. It's perfect.
:theboss


The difference is that the rules of the game on many sites (but not all - Cake comes to mind) allow using tools to collect and analyze the hands you've played. Consider a baseball analogy... we scout the other team and make statistics about their tendencies so we can make better decisions during the game. Contrast this with using a pitching machine to serve up the pitch at 180 mph in a very repeatable spot. One is allowed, the other is not. This doesn't mean pitching machines are bad... players use them offline to practice.

The argument that successful players who have won a lot by following the rules somehow deserve to be cheated falls flat with me.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 6:12 am 
Offline
Senior member
User avatar

Posts: 133
Location: Post & Hyde
Favourite Bot: bender bot
bwtaylor wrote:
The fact that ai is cool has little to do with injecting it into forums where it's not welcome.

Everything to do with it. If you're working on the Coolest Project in the World, you're not gonna read the TOS and click Decline. Being "unwelcome" doesn't factor into the equation. If you're genuinely curious about where botters think they stand on the white/black hat spectrum (which I doubt now), the answer is "Mad Scientist".
Quote:
The difference is that the rules of the game on many sites allow using tools to collect and analyze the hands you've played.

The rules let me drink and smoke, but I need a prescription to get 600mg ibuprofen. (If I take 3 over-the-counter ibuprofen at once am I breaking the rules?) Point being, HUDs are allowed because so many players use them. Doesn't change the fact that most online pros use HUD software to exploit unsophisticated players.
Quote:
The argument that successful players who have won a lot by following the rules somehow deserve to be cheated falls flat with me.

Well... they sure deserve to lose. Take a guy, he buys this software secret-weapon, expecting to exploit the dummies -- which he does for a while -- but then he ends up being exploited by people with better software which they wrote themselves. Who wouldn't see the poetic justice in that?

Well, I guess he wouldn't. :twisted:


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:55 am 
Offline
Junior member
User avatar

Posts: 20
Favourite Bot: TBD
Sam_Spade wrote:
Everything to do with it. If you're working on the Coolest Project in the World, you're not gonna read the TOS and click Decline. Being "unwelcome" doesn't factor into the equation. If you're genuinely curious about where botters think they stand on the white/black hat spectrum (which I doubt now), the answer is "Mad Scientist".


I still fail to see why "the Coolest Project in the World" (I think you have delusions of grandeur, btw) is somehow less cool if it's used honestly. I came to poker from the chess world, where very strong bots are ubiquitous and all strong players use them, just not while they are competing against each other. Seriously, is learning to play strong poker yourself using your bot simply as a training aid not sufficiently cool? I think math, CS, ai, all that stuff is really interesting. But I'm not interested in using it to cheat people. You can't put your bot into one of the bot tournaments and have it compete there!?

Quote:
Quote:
The difference is that the rules of the game on many sites allow using tools to collect and analyze the hands you've played.

The rules let me drink and smoke, but I need a prescription to get 600mg ibuprofen. (If I take 3 over-the-counter ibuprofen at once am I breaking the rules?) Point being, HUDs are allowed because so many players use them. Doesn't change the fact that most online pros use HUD software to exploit unsophisticated players.


Actually, most online pros don't need HUDs to exploit unsophisticated players, but even if they did, it's up to you as a player to know what is and isn't allowed and to maximize your chances within that framework. You really think Phil Ivey is sitting there with a HUD? There are sites that don't allow HUDs, and sites that restrict what they can access. If you play on a site that allows them, you have no legitimate complaint if your opponents use a HUD. Your recourse if you feel it provides an advantage is to also use the allowed tools.

Your ibuprofen analogy makes no sense at all. OK, HUD's are allowed because many players use them. Let's say you are right. So?! Explain how you get from that to "so I can do whatever I want".

Quote:
Quote:
The argument that successful players who have won a lot by following the rules somehow deserve to be cheated falls flat with me.

Well... they sure deserve to lose. Take a guy, he buys this software secret-weapon, expecting to exploit the dummies -- which he does for a while -- but then he ends up being exploited by people with better software which they wrote themselves. Who wouldn't see the poetic justice in that?

Well, I guess he wouldn't. :twisted:


It sounds like you are bitter that you couldn't win through honest competition, and you attribute this to the other players taking advantage of allowed tools (that were also available to you), so you think it's OK to use banned tools in blatent disregard to what you agreed to. You think its "cool" to win in the unfair contest that results. I see no poetry there. And I see injustice, not justice -- any winnings you have are basically stealing. Why don't you just go rob a convenience store with a homemade gun? I'm sure you could give me some BS argument about how "they" deserve it too.

And let's be honest -- you aren't really beating the pros with your tools are you? Maybe someday, but for now, if you are beating anybody, it's the donks.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 10:34 am 
Offline
Senior member
User avatar

Posts: 168
Favourite Bot: none
While I am not 100% comfortable with the ethics of botting, your stance is probably a little extreme. Comparing botting to robbing convenience stores or collusion is simply ridiculous.

Some things to think about:

1. There is basically no other way to test the strength of an ai. Botting competitions are rare, and bot vs bot is not a great way to measure playing strength.

2. There are a bunch of grey areas. Consider the discussion at viewtopic.php?f=80&t=2073

3. What is the right line to draw in terms of assistance? On pokerstars, hand evaluators are allowed but icm calculators generally aren't. Seems pretty arbitrary to me. The TOS are so vague in places its hard to tell what is and isn't allowed.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 2:54 pm 
Offline
Senior member
User avatar

Posts: 133
Location: Post & Hyde
Favourite Bot: bender bot
Quote:
I see no poetry there. And I see injustice, not justice -- any winnings you have are basically stealing. Why don't you just go rob a convenience store with a homemade gun? I'm sure you could give me some BS argument about how "they" deserve it too.

Okay, now I get it. You've got this conflict scenario bouncing around inside your head, so you're not hearing what I'm saying. You're just following the scenario.

One time I was walking back to my car when I saw an enormously overweight meter maid giving me a ticket. Right at the moment I realized I was getting written up, she looked at me and said "At least you could say thank you." Then she waddled back to her golf cart and puttered away. Thank you for... not giving me a ticket? She hadn't even not given me the ticket yet.

That's what you're doing.

Quote:
I still fail to see why "the Coolest Project in the World" (I think you have delusions of grandeur, btw) is somehow less cool if it's used honestly.

The question was, how do you botters feel about the ethics? My answer (spelled out) was, it's such a cool project that most botters see the mild ethical issues as trifling. Like Frankenstein worrying about zoning violations. That's the answer to the question. Peasants with torches? Whatever... pull up the drawbridge. (Oops, one climbed the wall.)

But to understand that you've got to understand the cool, which you clearly don't:

Quote:
I came to poker from the chess world, where very strong bots are ubiquitous and all strong players use them, just not while they are competing against each other. Seriously, is learning to play strong poker yourself using your bot simply as a training aid not sufficiently cool?

No, it's not sufficiently cool. The point isn't to help people play better poker. It's not about poker players, it's about AI. That's the thing that draws the intense interest. Even for the casual hobbyists, it's the appeal of creating an agent that exhibits behaviors and makes decisions. And you're sure not gonna skip the step where you zap it to life and let it run around terrorizing the peasants.

Quote:
Your ibuprofen analogy makes no sense at all. OK, HUD's are allowed because many players use them. Let's say you are right. So?! Explain how you get from that to "so I can do whatever I want".

It's not an ibuprofen analogy, it's an addiction analogy. So many people are addicted to HUDs that most sites have decided it doesn't make economic sense to ban them. But a poker site's TOS don't carry a whole lotta ethical weight, anyway. My view is, both HUDs and bots are at about the same moral level as the game itself. The object is to get money from less sophisticated opponents. But, you say, people don't know who's a bot and who's not? Well, they don't know who's using a HUD, either. And they don't know who's better than they are. That's what makes it possible for the pros to earn a living at it. It ain't pretty, but it's poker.

And for the guys with the HUD software to complain that the guys with the bot software are unethically stealing the fish.... well, if that doesn't trigger the BS detector, nothing will.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 4:06 pm 
Offline
Senior member
User avatar

Posts: 226
Location: Stockholm
Favourite Bot: ---
bwtaylor wrote:
Sam_Spade wrote:
Everything to do with it. If you're working on the Coolest Project in the World, you're not gonna read the TOS and click Decline. Being "unwelcome" doesn't factor into the equation. If you're genuinely curious about where botters think they stand on the white/black hat spectrum (which I doubt now), the answer is "Mad Scientist".


I still fail to see why "the Coolest Project in the World" (I think you have delusions of grandeur, btw) is somehow less cool if it's used honestly. I came to poker from the chess world, where very strong bots are ubiquitous and all strong players use them, just not while they are competing against each other. Seriously, is learning to play strong poker yourself using your bot simply as a training aid not sufficiently cool? I think math, CS, ai, all that stuff is really interesting. But I'm not interested in using it to cheat people. You can't put your bot into one of the bot tournaments and have it compete there!?


I've played chess a few times and I think it is cheating that you have access to advanced computer programs to train on cause I don't.

More seriously, what is the point you're trying to make in this thread? What do you hope to accomplish?

You've by know realized that there are what you call black hats on this site and they're not banned once "discovered". By your writing
it's pretty clear that you haven't started this to have people convince you that it's ok to bot against unknowing players. And you
pretty much must realize that just because you come here and say you think it's unethical to bot will stop noone from doing it.

Sam_Spade wrote:
And for the guys with the HUD software to complain that the guys with the bot software are unethically stealing the fish.... well, if that doesn't trigger the BS detector, nothing will.


People are so stupid it's unbelievable.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 6:16 pm 
Offline
Senior member
User avatar

Posts: 356
Favourite Bot: OpenHoldem
Sam_Spade wrote:
The object is to get money from less sophisticated opponents.


Well put! I think this is the key difference between bottling and colluding. A bot has no inherent edge over a human with a good HUD, while a player (human or bot) who sees more than 2 cards has a massive advantage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 9:25 pm 
Offline
Senior member
User avatar

Posts: 171
Favourite Bot: RoboJeff (@OH)
Bwtaylor, according to your strict standards all botters are black-hat-guys
(the finest dark-night-black).

Though IMO you are wrong with some assumption about the "white-hat-guys".
Consider the following points:
  • Though HUDs are not neccessary for a good player, nearly all pros do use them - to be able to play more tables and to make sometimes slightly better decisions. The majority of less good, but ambitioned players does actually very much depend on them. Poker is about exploiting "fish" and winning money, not about honour. That is a flaw of poker, not of botting.
  • Many regulars do datamine, exchange hand-histories or buy millions of hands from mining-services, though such practices are strictly forbidden by many sites. People in pokerforums like http://www.twoplustwo.com do openly discuss and encourage such practises, while they condemn botting.
  • I have seen so many newbies and wannabee-botters in various poker-forums, that must have been half the poker-world.
  • High-stakes players seem to practise multi-accounting and "ghosting" (using other peoples accounts) regulary to confuse their opponents and get an "unfair advantage".
Is that more honest than botting?
(I know, that does not make botting any better).

But there are two arguments for botting:
  • It is intellectually and technically more challenging
  • It is less boring
and one, why it is no cheating.
  • Developing and maintening a good bot and a reliable setup is hard work. Harder than playing yourself. Enjoy the bane in my signature.

_________________
In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 11:19 pm 
Offline
Junior member
User avatar

Posts: 20
Favourite Bot: TBD
TheHighFish wrote:
Bwtaylor, according to your strict standards all botters are black-hat-guys

It appears many here are, but I don't agree "all" are. A bot is a tool. Making a tool is neither good nor bad. It's how you use the tool. I use Poker Academy and it's bots, I use SNGWizard, I use poker stove, I've written my own hand evaluator and can appreciate the awesomeness of the RayW one. Creating a bot is one thing. Using one against people who expect to play real people is another. It's clear you don't respect your fellow competitors as human beings.
    Quote:
  • Though HUDs are not neccessary for a good player, nearly all pros do use them - to be able to play more tables and to make sometimes slightly better decisions. The majority of less good, but ambitioned players does actually very much depend on them. Poker is about exploiting "fish" and winning money, not about honour. That is a flaw of poker, not of botting.

  • Bernie Madoff says the same thing about investing. Only the scale is different, not the principals. Poker is a game. Games have rules. You either follow them or you don't. Poker is not about exploiting "fish" and winning money. It's about competing on equal footing and getting the just rewards as a share of what's wagered based on the merit of your play within the rules. If there is a site that allows bots, then I have no problem. If that requires them to be clearly labelled, fine. If it doesn't fine. In chess there are such sites. Any money you win under false pretense is fraud and you are absolutely delusional if you think that with all the facts presented to it, that any court wouldn't agree. I'd like to know if you are delusional or not, so please confirm that you recognize this.

    Quote:
  • Many regulars do datamine, exchange hand-histories or buy millions of hands from mining-services, though such practices are strictly forbidden by many sites. People in pokerforums like http://www.twoplustwo.com do openly discuss and encourage such practises, while they condemn botting.

  • True enough. This just happened with the cardrunners pros who effectively cheated to defeat ilsildur1 out of millions. I'm surprised that he hasn't sued for his money back. He would win. I advocate changing that rule, by the way. I don't know of any sport were "scouting" is illegal. I think sporting contests should be waged by showing up with your god given talent and any knowledge or ability you've acquired and may the best person win. But I acknowledge and respect that the house rules don't see it that way. But until those rules are changed, it's wrong to do it.
    Quote:
  • I have seen so many newbies and wannabee-botters in various poker-forums, that must have been half the poker-world.
  • High-stakes players seem to practise multi-accounting and "ghosting" (using other peoples accounts) regulary to confuse their opponents and get an "unfair advantage".
Quote:
Is that more honest than botting?
(I know, that does not make botting any better.)
You answered your own question. Are you really ready to say that you can't be ethical and honest until everyone else in the world is?

The arguments presented here all fail. They seem to come in two forms: (A) activity XYZ is similar, but it's allowed, so it's OK for me to cheat or (B) other people cheat in way XYZ so it's OK for me to cheat. Courts here these sorry excuses every day from all kinds of people who think the rules don't apply to them and don't respect other peoples rights.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 11:43 pm 
Offline
Junior member
User avatar

Posts: 20
Favourite Bot: TBD
pplatypus wrote:
While I am not 100% comfortable with the ethics of botting, your stance is probably a little extreme. Comparing botting to robbing convenience stores or collusion is simply ridiculous.

That was a response to his argument. But why is it rediculous? Several
Quote:
1. There is basically no other way to test the strength of an ai. Botting competitions are rare, and bot vs bot is not a great way to measure playing strength.

If no way exists, then make one. Just do it ethically. If I want to play poker against real people on pokerstars, it is not my problem. However, the poker rooms might actually be motivated to help you. It is a problem if not legitimate venue exists.
Quote:
2. There are a bunch of grey areas. Consider the discussion at viewtopic.php?f=80&t=2073

The existence of grey areas does not disprove the existence of black and white areas, nor does it diminish the role of the house in clarifying those grey areas into black or white areas.
Quote:
3. What is the right line to draw in terms of assistance? On pokerstars, hand evaluators are allowed but icm calculators generally aren't. Seems pretty arbitrary to me. The TOS are so vague in places its hard to tell what is and isn't allowed.

There is no "right" line. Any game this big involves many boundary definitions of what's allowed that are somewhat arbitrary. So what!? The rules involve some arbitary decisions, so you can follow the ones you want? No. If the TOS are vague, ask for clarification.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:18 am 
Offline
Senior member
User avatar

Posts: 172
Favourite Bot: don't know
bwtayler, I don't get your intention ?

You started with a fairly open question:

bwtaylor wrote:
How accepting is this forum to of contributions and topics of interest only to black hat botters? Does the forum tolerate all comers who have skills and techniques relevant to software tools for poker, or is there an expectation that these tools be used according to a high ethical standard.


Reading the answers so far (and also having a look at the FAQ, see http://pokerai.org/pf3/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=1781 / "Online botting forums" you should have realized, that "Black Hat" people are not banned from here, thou discussions in violation of sites ToS are not welcome.
You will find 'high ethical standard' and also the opposite here.

You have good points, but you won't change the world.

So decide if you post here in a true White Hat fashion (or don't post but create an academic paper) - but be aware that some Black Hats will ALWAYS be reading your stuff once you published - if you want or not. They can do it anyway, even without registering on these forums.

The only other option you have is to not post at all - or make your paper so sophisticated with a lot of formulas and stuff, that only true academics are able to understand it :).


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:20 am 
Offline
Senior member
User avatar

Posts: 451
Favourite Bot: gimmick
I think you confuse terms and conditions of the networks with actual laws.
You seem pretty sure that botting is illegal, yet no botter has ever been sued, let alone condemned.

Actually UK has shown to disagree with TOS of (real) casinos for what gambling concerns.
A few years ago a team of people managed to win a big amount of money with a sophisticated algorithm to forecast roulette's outcome. They were banned and sued by the casino, but won the court because for the laws they wasn't changing the chances, just forecasting them, so that wasn't cheating, and the casino paid the winnings. Equally, would be legal (even if considered cheating and not allowed by the casinos) to play black jack with pen and paper. According to this interpretation of UK's laws, botting would not be cheating as a bot doesn't know your cards, but only tries to forecast value of actions, as other players do.

Different place, different laws, but laws are neither aligned with what you believe should be, nor with what casinos believe should be (except probably in Nevada).


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 4:45 am 
Offline
Senior member
User avatar

Posts: 133
Location: Post & Hyde
Favourite Bot: bender bot
For those who missed it, there's an interesting article in the NY Review of Books by Garry Kasparov. He describes an experiment where teams of humans competed with AI assistance. And he concludes that Poker might be better than chess for AI research. I guess most people here already knew that!

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/23592


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Hat Colors, Ethics, Botting
PostPosted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 9:52 am 
Offline
Senior member
User avatar

Posts: 338
Favourite Bot: Geoff V2
I get the feeling that bwtaylor didn't start this thread with an open mind, but with the sole intention of having a good old winge about online botting.

At least most botters used their own skills to produce their bots... unlike HUD users. I'm not sure how it's cheating when most botters are better at poker than their bots anyway, you could consider the bot a handicap!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 37 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: