Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | xXSLAYERXx's commentslogin

It was truly a wild time. All the books desperate for action in this new online gambling world (US). I went from book to book, took "advantage" of their promos, never collected a dime. When I was up, I bet more. Hit zero? Go to the next book. Their lines were better anyway ;)

At this point I question whether they should even be allowed to advertise.

No. A lot of the Australian ads play on the "this gimmick feature means if you lose you win!"

What it aleays means is you still win or lose a bet they just shuffled the permutations so that you win and lose in different outcomes.

But emotiionally they sell it as them giving you a chance. Pretty manipulative.

Examples would be like "money back if your horse comes second" or "bet on horse coming 3rd 4th or 5th" or "if your team is up at half time we count it as a win".

They are just offering a different wager!


It shouldn't even be allowed to exist, there are literally zero positive outcomes for anyone. On aggregate, people just lose money. And no, it's not entertainment.

And for the operator, they make money by... doing nothing? That's a huge red flag. Usually if that's the case, then the business is not legitimate.


The marketing is what bothers me the most. These books market very aggressively in app: Take Daves 5 leg parlay; Share your picks! 30% profit boost if you do a 4 leg parlay that'll never hit. Its constant engagement. Contrast this to a real bookie: Open app. Place bet. Meet once a week in parking lot. Small chatter. Pass envelope.

Reminds me of this wild story: https://www.si.com/betting/2023/09/15/fake-indian-cricket-le...

Basically, a fake "Cricket league" was setup up in rural India, complete with online streaming, play by play commentary, etc. just to fool gamblers in Russia. Worth the read.


Great article, thanks for sharing. Reminds me of here in the states during early covid. Betting on darts in some Eastern European league knowing full well the fix could be in.

Gosh - I thought I was bleeding edge with my instructions to codex, with all my .md files and such. Lots more to learn!

> However, I've seen multiple times where cops initiate a felony stop

At what point do we accept that all systems are flawed? There could be many variables as to why the perp wasn't in the car. Maybe the perp stole the car. Maybe the perp borrowed the car. Maybe these systems do not work well in fog etc etc. I don't know how we're supposed to advance technology that makes us safer without getting into these muky situations from time to time.


Technology is a means to an end, not the end itself. If you can’t make it safe then don’t deploy it.


There must be some level of acceptable failure.


Flock, like Palantir, is the Torment Nexus from the famous novel Don’t Create The Torment Nexus.

Considering the potential and demonstrated abuse there must be more robust guardrails than currently exist. The required level of safety is more like “nuclear launch codes” or “commercial airliner”, not “local used car lot landing page”.

This juice ain’t worth the squeeze.


Why do anything at all?


Why even deploy such systems? I would support less for sure.


> Code review should be mandatory and reviewers should ask big PRs to be broken up

Always, even before all this madness. It sounds more like a function of these teams CR process rather than agents writing the code. Sometimes super large prs are necessary and I've always requested a 30 minute meeting to discuss.

I don't see this as an issue, just noise. Reduce the PR footprint. If not possible meet with the engineer(s)


I'm curious what you've used it for? I was firmly in your camp until about a month ago when i used codex to dust off an old side project. I hadn't touched the project in six months. This was literally my first prompt:

"Explain the codebase to a newcomer. What is the general structure, what are the important things to know, and what are some pointers for things to learn next?"

Once I saw the output I giddyup'd and haven't looked back.


I'd argue you still have to stay engaged, if not more-so. Its a different type of engagement. Look at you: You're the CTO now.


It's hard to be engaged when you are constantly jumping from one thing/prompt to another vs you are actually doing the work.


I still write code but do not push everything off to the agent. Try my best to write small tasks. ~20% of the time I have to get in there. If someone says they're absolutely not writing a line of code they must have amazing guardrails.


> This is such a strange take. Your words remind me of past crypto hype cycles, where people pushed web3.0 and NFT FOMO hysteria.

Thats a little harsh. I think most everyone would agree we're in a transformative time for engineering. Sure theres hype, but the adoption in our profession (assuming you're an engineer) isn't waning.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: