2p2 data breach/security exploit

I didn't know this at the time, and please show me where I ridiculed you for it - you used to message me a bunch talking about it to me in every message, I'm not meaning to be disrespectful by not taking to your idea - I have no idea what you are talking about for your game

For this game burning, you haven't been listening to me then either.

If you apologize to me I might consider it but I can't control how long they let you stay if you are going to act like this about your ideas in there

Phil Galfond why did you ban mine and Nash's ideas from your poker forum:

[QUOTE=Ideal Poker by Soaker Patoshi]
Our observation, based on thinking in terms of “the long term" rather than in terms of “short range expediency", was simply that there is no ideal rate of rake that should be selected and chosen as the target but rather that the ideal concept would necessarily be that of a zero rate for what is called rake

But of course, also, poker sites of a state cannot actually do anything of the form that can be called “rake targeting" without having some means for measuring rake. How would they do this? The means for measuring inflation that they would naturally use would be a “deposits raked" index relating to domestic transactions within the territory of the state[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Ideal Money by John Nash]Our observation, based on thinking in terms of “the long term” rather than in terms of “short range expediency”, was simply that there is no ideal rate of inflation that should be selected and chosen as the target but rather that the ideal concept would necessarily be that of a zero rate for what is called inflation.

But of course, also, central monetary authorities of a state cannot actually do anything of the form that can be called “inflation targeting” without having some means for measuring inflation. How would they do this? The means for measuring inflation that they would naturally use would be a “cost of living” index relating to domestic prices within the territory of the state.[/QUOTE]

What are you asking for an apology about? You have a HUGE influence when it comes to the matter of the players pushing back against the establishment here.

So we agree that you were aware of all this, but you don't believe you were ridiculing me.

Ok. Sometimes when people write stuff like 'lol' Its hard to discern if one is being laughed AT or with. Perhaps I misunderstood.

I said you have been commentating it. I mean we agree that the game has been burning, and that you have been talking over it. Do you mean to argue that you were saying things that HELP the game. Its a catch 22 when you were actively and knowingly ignoring my ideas right?

Give me a platform in front of the players.

If you apologize to me and stop being an ******* towards me I will consider it.

How do you feel about pros taking over accounts of bad players?

It's something I always watch out for when playing online, I don't agree with people doing that but that's a common move. The actual way the online poker world works is nothing like it "should" be - everyone is trying to get some type of edge, the software operators included. It depends on the arena that you are in.

Its not blackmailing that the players have been hidden from the truth of the control over the game. I'm not blackmailing. The game has been held hostage, the integrity of it. I'm releasing it from its holders

That is one way to spin it

Why did we ban Nash's words:

[QUOTE=Ideal Poker by Soaker Patoshi]But this function of chips in generally facilitating the transfer of utility would seem to be as well performed by the currency of PSFTCIAFBIDOJ as by that of a player run site. Or the question can be asked “How do `raked poker' and `rakeless poker’ differ, if at all, for the valuable function of facilitating utility transfer?". But if we consider contracts having a relatively long time axis then the difference can be seen clearly.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Ideal Money by John Nash]But this function of money in generally facilitating the transfer of utility would seem to be as well performed by the currency of Thailand as by that of Switzerland. Or the question can be asked “How do ‘good money’ and ‘bad money’ differ, if at all, for the valuable function 2 of facilitating utility transfer?”. But if we consider contracts having a relatively long time axis then the difference can be seen clearly.[/QUOTE]

If its to be sincere, I need to understand what you would like me to apologize for. Is it swearing in an email? Everyone knows I have issues in that regard. I'm sorry for that.

You've been trying to message me about it for years but I never understood what you are talking about, I didn't ridicule you. I meet people like you all the time with some type of idea that they think will change the world and I'm not saying they are wrong or right but there is a lot more that goes into it if your goal is to get your idea out to the masses as you are saying you want to do.

I've been training to take a different path to fixing the problem or provide another solution - but it's never been easier to make a poker platform, there will always be different worlds of poker. Even if you invent a new form or version of it. I think it has potential to build into something pretty great depending on who creates it - if you aren't one of those people who create it, you don't really have much input into what it looks like.

I still don't understand your idea - you want to do poker with no rake?

I figured out a way, to arrange the entire economy of the game, so that cheating is mathematically highlighted from the PLAYERS view. So that players can KNOW if sites are being nefarious in ANY hidden way...

But the players were sold the lies the pokers sites MUST function as trust third parties.

Its a lie, that creates a security leak for the game.

Its too nuanced to get you to understand when you don't know me and don't know how intelligent I am. So the best the community left me with, was to burn in your mind I exist, and that some esoteric concept is important to me.

Thats the best I could do at the time.

My ideas take time to understand and require nuanced dialogue this is how bitcoin was bootstrapped, it took GREAT discussion.

I think he's starting to get a pretty good idea.

Its already created. Its not a new platform. Thinking in terms of new platforms is a trap. All new platforms are TTPs. Phil Galfonds RIO was a TTP for the players. It didn't do anything we want.

I'm presenting a completely new paradigm. I tried to present to phil, its just like bitcoin, its just as hard understanding.

There is a hidden rake. One that has no name in the common sphere. I tried to give it a name so it wouldn't get buried effective rake (harder to ban this phrase)

Its the same thing as our central bankers telling us that inflation is around 2% when for all the things we actually buy our self-interested inflation rate is well over 10x that.

Well you can have 2 poker sites all things equal except the players pool. Both sites have 7% rake lets say, but one site is FAR more soft than the other. Isn't that what the good player really cares about?

Well from the poker site perspective, THATS how they view rake. From the players perspective we don't have a name for it, I call it effective rake. Its the rake regardless of the advertised %

And its a critical observation. This is Nash's words about MONEY, arranged for Poker:

[QUOTE=Ideal Poker by John Nash]The Confessional of Targeting

It was the observation of a new “line" that has become popular with those responsible for “raked" functions relating to national poker sites that gave us the idea for the study of “asymptotically rakeless" poker.

The idea seems paradoxical, but by speaking of “rake targeting" these responsible officials are effectively CONFESSING that, notwithstanding how they formerly were speaking about the difficulties and problems of their functions, that it is indeed after all possible to control rake by controlling the supply of chips (as if by limiting the amount of individual “prints" that could be made of a work of art being produced as “prints"). This popularity of the line of “rake targeting" seems to have started in the US, which is the place, among the USA, Canada, Australia, and Europe, which had the most losing players. And we can note also that US was hardly a place where any crisis of poverty really forced them to not maintain the value of their chips but rather just a place where “raked" thinking was probably very influential.[/QUOTE]

I think that is a standard part of the poker world - the sites try to do things as best as they can in theory but you really never know as the player. I don't have the expectation the poker site or casino will be telling me much about anything nefarious happening. You as the operator have so much power because you control the software, the accounts and the price inside.

People are open to a new way to do poker if you have the platform to host it on - I don't think the centralized model is going away anytime soon but I could see two different worlds for it.

and it obviously creates a security leak for the game - the person putting on the game always has a big advantage.

Why are you being so hostile to me about all of this? I asked you to talk and you told me to ( _ ) - I can go around aggressively yelling at people my theory on something they did all day long just like you are doing. You keep trying to accuse me of something.

Maybe you are right but there is an art to delivering your ideas to get people to back them. Everyone has an idea

Remember Nio Nio? Well it was Josem credited for finally pushing the players to accept the truth of the cheating. But did we ever REALLY learn the truth? What we DID learn from the math is Josem is WELL acquainted with the concept of EFFECTIVE RAKE.

Josem went on to be COMPETITOR to the players in this regard

Remember how hard it was to push this to acceptance within the community...thats because obviously people on the scandal side flooded the community and conversation to spread disinformation.

So it really IS critical WHO guards the narratives in NVG.

jbouton, is this a reasonable summary of your position?

appreciate i wont have captured the nuances but let me know if the main themes are correct

1) the rake is too damn high.

2) in theory, the correct amount of rake is 0

3) the wider player pool is mostly unaware of this

4) the poker establishment (poker sites, certain prominent poker players, certain 2+2 mods) have a vested interests in keeping the rake high

5) your efforts over time to make the wider player pool aware of the theoretically correct rake rate of 0% has been suppressed by the poker establishment

6) certain prominent poker players are intentionally promulgating bad poker strategies in literature and podcasts

These are NASH'S ideas, and this is supposed to be a poker forum. And they were BANNED.

Isn't central banker job to tell you whatever the **** they want to tell you that fits in with their marketing?

How should effective rake be implemented for a different poker experience or to include in the average poker experience?

Give me the paradigm - I am open to ideas

Thank you!

That is a different way to think about it - the poker world is its own matrix, easy to get trapped in the mindset created for us by the old poker sites!

I can see a lot of different arguments on all sides

There was a long term concerted effort by the industry to convice the GOOD players the 2p2 community to accept that raked poker is better than not rake poker and that higher rake is better than lower rake. The best I could do was gather a history of examples of being banned simply for stating the opposite.

But when ur playing with the nash equilibrium strategies you can see your opponents unnatural deviations. So I was able to reveal to myself WHO was working secretly in concert with these sites.

The old guard.

And now I have GREAT proof of this guard working against the integrity of the game for the history of it live and online

From a reasonable dialogue standpoint, I have shown that the dialogue here was not reasonable, thats a plato/Aristotle level thing. It was my only tool for people like you to one day understand.

Its not that we want ONE site to lower its rake, its that the industry monopolized A HIDDEN rake and now they have raised it through the roof just like our central banks have done so with hidden inflation.

Simply opening the dialogue blasts this wide open and away, and then if we can get into nuanced discussed I can't present ideas and solutions that were previously banned.

How is the operator of the game going to make money with a 0 rake system if they have to build their company?

Sponsorships only?

These websites are businesses so if you're saying you've been trying to put them out of business with your new idea and they didn't like that, I can see why.

What Nash explains in his proposal for Ideal Money, is that if you have a GOOD money introduced as a global settlement medium that is COMPLETELY apolitical and untouchable by central banking, it will quandrize efforts to hide TRUE inflation from the public.

DUCY?

See he was explaining that the 'Keynesians' have sold to the public the idea that BAD money is GOOD money and GOOD money is BAD money.

can i assume that hidden rake is something different to the normal rake (by normal rake i am talking about the $1 or w/e that is taken out of a pot by the poker site before sending the rest of the pot to the winner of the hand)

help me understand the precise nature of the hidden rake