shuffle machines

[Gottlob1]

Speaking of religious apostasy, and "the supreme law of the land", look at that post by jdog? I guess that A=0 IQ just isn't in tune with the universe, can't put it succinctly.

If there's one thing that the Covid debacle showed us... it's that pharma OWNS our media now. This is a big problem.

---> There is a god: How the world's most notorious atheist changed his mind.

https://anagram-solver.net/%20%20%20...0?partial=true

Antony Garrard Newton Flew was an English philosopher. Belonging to the analytic and evidentialist schools of thought, Flew worked on the philosophy of religion. During the course of his career he taught philosophy at the universities of Oxford, Aberdeen, Keele, and Reading in the United Kingdom, and at York University in Toronto, Canada.

For much of his career Flew was an advocate of atheism, arguing that one should presuppose atheism until empirical evidence suggesting the existence of a God surfaces. He also criticised the idea of life after death, the free will defence to the problem of evil, and the meaningfulness of the concept of God. In 2003, he was one of the signatories of the Humanist Manifesto III. He also developed the No true Scotsman fallacy, and debated retrocausality with Michael Dummett.

However, in 2004 he changed his position, and stated that he now believed in the existence of an intelligent designer of the universe, shocking colleagues and fellow atheists. In order to further clarify his personal conception of God, Flew openly made an allegiance to Deism, more specifically a belief in the Aristotelian God, a Divine Watchmaker removed from human affairs but responsible for the intricate workings of the universe, and dismissed on many occasions a hypothetical conversion to Christianity, Islam, or any other religion. He stated that in keeping his lifelong commitment to go where the evidence leads, he now believed in the existence of a God.

In 2007 a book outlining his reasons for changing his position, There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind, was written by Flew in collaboration with Roy Abraham Varghese, and included a chapter on the resurrection of Jesus. An article in The New York Times Magazine alleged that Flew's intellect had declined due to senility, and that the book was primarily the work of Varghese; Flew himself specifically denied this, stating that the book represented his views; although he acknowledged that due to his age Varghese had done most of the actual work of writing the book.

Another coincidence was that MrV turned up, very shortly after the apostasy-anagram post before jdog's reply.

[accountinquestion]

Might be possible with this particular type of single deck machine. I think the simplicity of having just 1 card / slot is part of why. Still, the programmers themselves did not do it, just said it could be done. They only got as far (supposedly anyway) as using the machine's own camera to be able to see the order of the cards, not change them.

As far as a multi deck shuffler, different animal I assume.

In any case, this article doesn't make you other than still a liar with regards to the shuffling machine dispute you have or had ongoing with AccountInQuestion and the others. And that's why you brought it up, no?

I am not known for reading things closely and thoroughly but I didn't get that they accessed the cameras. Really that doesn't make sense unless the machines were made to stream video off the usb port but lets just agree that isn't possible. That is as likely as Kewl hiring a guy to crack it at all - let alone 15 minutes.

If that feature was not built-in (camera->usb) then they would have to change something in the code itself which they didn't do.

"I am not known for reading things closely and thoroughly." LOL. 'Nuff said.

Here's my issue with account on this topic. I am going to have lunch with a bunch of academics tomorrow who have some interest in this. They have seen this video and read some reports on the subject. They have some security and programming experience among them. Now, obviously, I don't know a damned thing about shuffle machines. One close friend of mine, however, has some casino managerial experience and can report on the history he's seen and how some abuses of the machines evaded security. There was actually a story involving the LV Hilton years ago regarding this very topic. So this person, who will be at the lunch, will know much, much more than me. But this person is still not an expert and is reporting some second-hand info.

Back to my problem with account. I would love to report what he's written here as if it has some expertise and gravitas behind it. But the only thing I'm expert in is sports betting, and account has declared (not just suggested) some really naive and uninformed stuff that profiles him as not knowing a goddamn thing about sports betting. The issue, to put it bluntly, is that he poses as if he knows what he's talking about. And it doesn't matter what the topic is. The only subject, unfortunately, at which I can evaluate what he says...he really is clueless. He's off badly on basic premises and knows zero about widely known history or what's been done for the last 30 years. I mean, really, account would be kicked out of any serious sports gambling tete-a-tete.

So who is more right on this -- account or kewlJ? I am not qualified to judge, but if you put a gun to my head, I'd have to pass on the guy who doesn't read things "carefully or thoroughly." That kind of slop-admittance won't fly at lunch tomorrow.

So of what value is what account says regarding this? I have no idea. This entire forum is a clown act in terms of figuring out who actually knows what they are talking about. But if anyone wants to fly in and add two cents worth, expert or not -- lunch will be Wok and Hibachi in Johnson City, TN tomorrow at noon. Be there or be square.

oooh redietz! Is your discussion group anything like this?

In the dimly lit corner of a cozy café, a roundtable had been arranged to accommodate a group of esteemed academics. The room was filled with the soft hum of intellectual discussions, punctuated by sips of coffee and the occasional rustle of paper. At the center of the table sat a man in a fedora, an air of mystery surrounding him that seemed to match his choice of headwear.

His presence at the table was intriguing, as he was not typically associated with the academic community. Nonetheless, his reputation preceded him, and the academics were eager to hear his thoughts on the enigmatic YouTube video they had all watched.

The academics came from diverse backgrounds - mathematics, psychology, economics, and even a few from sociology. They were drawn together by their shared fascination with the intricacies of sports betting and casino shufflers, topics that often straddled the line between science and art. The YouTube video in question had showcased an individual known as the "ShuffleMaster," a shadowy figure claiming to have unlocked the secrets of card shuffling techniques.

As the discussion flowed, the academics dissected the video with an almost fervent enthusiasm. Dr. Evelyn Bennett, a statistics professor, theorized how the ShuffleMaster's techniques could potentially influence the outcomes of games, while Dr. Marcus Harper, a renowned psychologist, explored the psychological implications of manipulating shuffling to affect players' perceptions and decisions.

"Perhaps," Samuel began, his voice smooth and velvety, capturing the attention of the room, "the ShuffleMaster's methods aren't as groundbreaking as they appear. It's possible that what we're witnessing is a reimagining of centuries-old techniques, subtly blended with modern psychological insights."

The academics leaned in, captivated by Samuel's words. His reputation for unearthing hidden truths was well-known, and they respected his unique perspective.
"Consider this," Samuel continued, his fingers tapping rhythmically on the table. "Casinos have employed various card shuffling techniques for decades to ensure randomness and fairness. But behind that façade of unpredictability lies a delicate balance between chaos and control. The ShuffleMaster may have simply elevated this delicate balance to an art form."

As the conversation deepened, the room seemed to bristle with intellectual energy. The discussions veered from statistical probabilities to human behavior, from ancient card games to cutting-edge machine learning algorithms. The man in the fedora contributed his insights, steering the dialogue with a quiet but undeniable authority.

Hours turned into twilight, and eventually, the group began to disperse, their minds still buzzing with newfound revelations and theories. Samuel remained at the table for a while, gazing at the shadows dancing on the walls as his thoughts continued to swirl.

In the days that followed, the YouTube video and its implications reverberated far beyond that dimly lit room. The man in the fedora continued his pursuits, delving deeper into the intricacies of gambling and human nature. And as he walked away from the university that evening, his silhouette a testament to mystery and wisdom, he left behind a group of inspired academics, united by their shared passion and the enigmatic world of card shufflers.

----
chatgpt! bravo! bravo! bravo!

[redietz]

Today's trivia: What is the biggest difference between ChatGPT and accountinquestion? Answer at end of post.

Meanwhile, today, a larger group will meet for lunch. One anthropology professor, three sociology profs, a sociology PhD with a Harvard law degree, two professional gamblers, an economics professor, a grant-writing PhD specialist, and a retired postal employee (think Stanford Wong, also a postal employee) will be at Firehouse for a roundtable lunch. Noon. The Firehouse specialty is barbecue. Be there or be square. Shuffle machines will be discussed (the law guy is really interested).

I'm sure account would enjoy the company and contribute mightily to all discussions, his polymath status being legendary. Call Firehouse today and ask for the table with Jerry and the professional gamblers.

https://thefirehouse.com/


Answer to the previous question:

Unlike accountinquestion, ChatGPT reads things "carefully and thoroughly."

[Gottlob1]

Hey, Red. Provide a Zoom address. Or be shapeless. Ha.

P.S. My hearing finished, so off for the day, for at least a few days. Let's not be anonymous now. Let alone pull a "Singer". Going to get a good donut, and, then, breakfast.

[redietz]

Hey, Red. Provide a Zoom address. Or be shapeless. Ha.

P.S. My hearing finished, so off for the day, for at least a few days. Let's not be anonymous now. Let alone pull a "Singer". Going to get a good donut, and, then, breakfast.

Gottlob,

Lunches are usually Thursday and/or Friday. Thursday is often just a few people. You're welcome to join as my guest. Since you're nuts enough to fly in and make the trip, I figure why not? Just let me know a week or two in advance so I can arrange it. I don't make every lunch during football season, and I've been skipping some Thursdays due to physical therapy sessions.

Try to lay off the numbers and stick to good old fashioned conspiracy stuff, though.

[Gottlob1]

Ah, looks like I hit a nerve. Of course, no Zoom or other online meeting address. At least I'm not a fraud. As for the numerals, stick around to see my theory of everything, in terms of the fine-structure constants. You, too, may have spoken way too soon.

Geez, that donut was good. On to breakfast.

[redietz]

Ah, looks like I hit a nerve. Of course, no Zoom or other online meeting address. At least I'm not a fraud. As for the numerals, stick around to see my theory of everything, in terms of the fine-structure constants. You, too, may have spoken way too soon.

Geez, that donut was good. On to breakfast.

Yeah, that's quite a nerve. You suggest zooming from a restaurant for what? Who would do that?

I invite you to actually attend.

Yeah, much less credible than zooming.

I must be making stuff up. Definitely a fraud.

My fault for engaging you, Gottlob. You wouldn't do well interacting with actual credentials in a non-anonymous setting. But THAT might be worthy of a zoom.

[Gottlob1]

Earlier in this thread, you mentioned a gun to your head about KJ, and AIQ. Well, you very likely would have lost, either way, because there were several more possibilities. Both right, on the same or different point; both wrong, on the same or different point. How about both right, and wrong, on the same or different points? I couldn't care less that you're the Queen of England, and the rest were your princes in waiting, let alone to try to make my insults literary. (You can't hide stupid.)

[accountinquestion]

Today's trivia: What is the biggest difference between ChatGPT and accountinquestion? Answer at end of post.

Meanwhile, today, a larger group will meet for lunch. One anthropology professor, three sociology profs, a sociology PhD with a Harvard law degree, two professional gamblers, an economics professor, a grant-writing PhD specialist, and a retired postal employee (think Stanford Wong, also a postal employee) will be at Firehouse for a roundtable lunch. Noon. The Firehouse specialty is barbecue. Be there or be square. Shuffle machines will be discussed (the law guy is really interested).

I'm sure account would enjoy the company and contribute mightily to all discussions, his polymath status being legendary. Call Firehouse today and ask for the table with Jerry and the professional gamblers.

https://thefirehouse.com/


Answer to the previous question:

Unlike accountinquestion, ChatGPT reads things "carefully and thoroughly."

I don't need to read everything carefully and thoroughly. You do?

Given that Chatgpt doesn't understand anything at all then it can't do that.

Anyway, all not funny aside it is amusing how you've glommed on to me admitting I don't find everything important enough to read thoroughly. It is actually not that uncommon to make a judgement about what you're reading. I had already seen the video....

Speaking of the video .. in my world that video was crap. In your world it is interesting enough for have a discussion about with your smartest friends.

Hows them apples?

[Gottlob1]

To note that academics don't actually talk the way that Redietz lets on. For that matter, artificial intelligence. I've hung out with a few of the former, in my day, enough to know that they'd laugh at that baloney talk. Nor judges. Nor mathematicians. The world as a whole has nothing to fear of artificial intelligence, as the stuff of science fiction.

[accountinquestion]

BTW from what I'm seeing that is that Garnabby would be a very welcome addition to redietz's roundtable but once again Redietz is being a coward.

[Gottlob1]

How's trying to take over the forum, by taking a week off, or, ignoring me, going? Ha.

[MaxPen]

Ooof,,, we need to get the oily Irish surfer back posting or Singer needs to hit a $2 million VP hand and buy a new Newell.

[accountinquestion]

How's trying to take over the forum, by taking a week off, or, ignoring me, going? Ha.

I actually found one of your posts funny. Something about Trump being distracted from rewriting the Constitution.

[Rob.Singer]

Ooof,,, we need to get the oily Irish surfer back posting or Singer needs to hit a $2 million VP hand and buy a new Newell.

I'll give 9-1/2 to 1 that only the former comes to fruition.

[Gottlob1]

How's trying to take over the forum, by taking a week off, or, ignoring me, going? Ha.

I actually found one of your posts funny. Something about Trump being distracted from rewriting the Constitution.

I found it enlightening. In the sense that writing it lowercase can work equally well.

A constitution is the supreme law of the land. It takes precedence over all other laws in the country. A constitution describes how a country governs itself. It contains rules or principles which tell the government what it can or cannot do.

https://www.google.com/search?q=the+...t=firefox-b-ab

As long as not referring, in writing, specifically to the American Constitution.

I just wasn't sure who would take the bait.

Simply put, the supreme law of the land isn't per se the Constitution.

[mcap]

Today's trivia: What is the biggest difference between ChatGPT and accountinquestion? Answer at end of post.

Meanwhile, today, a larger group will meet for lunch. One anthropology professor, three sociology profs, a sociology PhD with a Harvard law degree, two professional gamblers, an economics professor, a grant-writing PhD specialist, and a retired postal employee (think Stanford Wong, also a postal employee) will be at Firehouse for a roundtable lunch. Noon. The Firehouse specialty is barbecue. Be there or be square. Shuffle machines will be discussed (the law guy is really interested).


https://thefirehouse.com/


Answer to the previous question:

Unlike accountinquestion, ChatGPT reads things "carefully and thoroughly."

So, basically, your fancy way of saying a bunch of random fucking amateurs about the topic being discussed.

Oh, and fuck you and the horse you rode in on Red, you condescending old prick.

[MisterV]

Ooof,,, we need to get the oily Irish surfer back posting or Singer needs to hit a $2 million VP hand and buy a new Newell.

Assuming hurricane Hilary hits sin city, we could see tales of derring-do following its passing.

Envision this: a surfer oils his board and then hangs ten on the waves crashing along the flooded strip.

Or perhaps the Man frou U.N.C.L.E. will regale us with tales of winning millions at a "floating crap game" on an inundated Tropicana.

No telling what mischief might unfold.

[MDawg]

Given that UNKewlJ lives in the underground sewers of Vegas, he should be more worried about flooding. His surfing story was disproved the same way most of his other stories - due to unending contradictions and lack of proof.

Las Vegas homeless tell of primal life underground, in 600 miles of city’s tunnels

[accountinquestion]

Given that UNKewlJ lives in the underground sewers of Vegas, he should be more worried about flooding. His surfing story was disproved the same way most of his other stories - due to unending contradictions and lack of proof.

Las Vegas homeless tell of primal life underground, in 600 miles of city’s tunnels

Day 2 of Kewl missing.

Found a video of Kewl.

Good to see he isn't wasting his time while not posting on here.