Thread

DraftKings is using AI to behaviorally target chronic gamblers

570 points · 432 comments · paimapi

tedivm · 1790700196 · focus · HN ↗
ProPublica had one of their reports work with gambling addition experts to see how DraftKings would respond to someone presenting signs of a gambling problem. It's a hell of a read, and makes it clear that this company is full of people with absolutely no ethics whatsoever.
<a href="https://www.propublica.org/article/draftkings-sports-gambling-problem-vip-fanduel" rel="nofollow">https://www.propublica.org/article/draftkings-sports-gamblin...
1. WheelsAtLarge · 1790703876 · focus · HN ↗
  People in companies that are a negative public good are by definition unethical. I'm not surprised by anything they do. The real problem is how we've let these companies infiltrate so much of our society so fast. I can't consume any ad supported media without getting some ad about them. This company really defines the phrase "money talks"
  1. jmyeet · 1790707616 · focus · HN ↗
    This falls under the umbrella of "there's no ethical consumption under capitalism". Everything you do supports somebody who's doing something bad. There's really no way to avoid it. Heck, it was even a plot point on The Good Place.
    The issue is that our economic system is coercive. You need a job. Now this doesn't excuse you from doing any job but you also need to live.
    Take the big tech companies. They're essentially military contractors now. Google, Amazon, Microsoft, etc are functionally no different to RTX, Boeing or Lockheed Martin.
    But should you treat someone who works on Android the same as someone who works out on AI systems for military targeting? Probably not. Also, Palantir is fundamentally more evil than any of these tech companies. So it's tricky.
    I do agree that online gambling as a whole is deeply unethical. There is no positive byproduct of this. Your salary is paid by people losing money, probably through addiction. And yes, you can say people have free will but you're still preying on and growing addiction.
    Analemma_ · 1790709824 · focus · HN ↗
    > This falls under the umbrella of "there's no ethical consumption under capitalism".
    No it doesn't. There is a time and place for the "no ethical consumption under capitalism" mantra, but increasingly (as is the case with your comment) it is being deployed as piece of whataboutism to distract from clearly unethical behavior by implying it is no worse than anything else. There's actually a massive difference between businesses which have complicated tradeoffs in the means of delivering what is basically a social good, and facilitating sports gambling, a negative-sum activity which ruins people's lives for basically no upside whatsoever.
    (It's deeply ironic that a slogan originally coined by socialists has found its most use by capitalists trying to get off the hook for their actions, but I guess most rebellious anti-establishment sentiments are ultimately co-opted for profitable ends.)
    pfisch · 1790711504 · focus · HN ↗
    Is any form of entertainment or art a social good?
    People can get "addicted" to practically any type of entertainment in that they spend a massive chunk of their time on it to the point it stifles their development.
    Is sports gambling worse than f2p games? Are f2p games worse than regular video games? Is someone addicted to video games worse than someone addicted to reading fantasy novels? What about smutty novels?
    I'm not sure is disagree with you but I think it is hard to start drawing these lines without saying you are now the arbiter of good art and bad art and you can ban some forms of art if you don't like them and have decided they are bad.
    Now are you just banning things you don't like because you point to the societal harms as a fig leaf defense that could be applied to the art you do like as well?
    bluefirebrand · 1790714473 · focus · HN ↗
    > I'm not sure is disagree with you but I think it is hard to start drawing these lines without saying you are now the arbiter of good art and bad art
    There's a super easy line to draw actually and it has nothing to do with art
    Are you selling a product or an experience?
    If you're talking about someone addicted to fantasy novels or video games, they are addicted to products.
    If you're talking about someone addicted to opening Magic the Gathering booster packs, or videogame loot boxes, or sports gambling, or prediction markets, they are addicted to experiences. In the case of loot boxes they are experiences shaped like products but the addiction is about the experience of opening the box, not really whatever is inside
    So.. easier than you seem to think
    Of course once lawyers get involved they'll quibble over this shit until the sun goes out
    pfisch · 1790715238 · focus · HN ↗
    Is selling a ticket to a movie an experience, or a product? Is a subscription to netflix a ticket or an experience? What about a subscription to world of warcraft?
    If you paid for world of warcraft by the hour does that change if it is an experience or a product?
    This doesn't really work because products and experiences have too much overlap.
    What you are really against I think is the different ways in which we are gift wrapping a skinner box, but there are an infinite number of ways to wrap it that will bypass your specification system.
    bluefirebrand · 1790717409 · focus · HN ↗
    > there are an infinite number of ways to wrap it that will bypass your specification system.
    Which will matter to no one except lawyers
    When most people smell shit they don't care if it's rat shit or cat shit, they just know it smells bad
    neutronicus · 1790729582 · focus · HN ↗
    Yes, banning video games would probably be a win for society.
    No, you probably won’t get anyone to admit to that here.
    mathgeek · 1790754082 · focus · HN ↗
    So would banning air travel, but such an example is purely to highlight how subjective “a win for society” is.
    Paradigma11 · 1790755839 · focus · HN ↗
    Luckily all those companies have done tons of research to exactly qualify and quantify exactly this. Those companies don't seem to have problems identifying those addictive mechanisms, why should the government?

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.