Thread

1. 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:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.propublica.org&#x2F;article&#x2F;draftkings-sports-gambling-problem-vip-fanduel" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.propublica.org&#x2F;article&#x2F;draftkings-sports-gamblin...

   1. WheelsAtLarge · 1790703876 · focus · HN ↗

      People in companies that are a negative public good are by definition unethical. I&#x27;m not surprised by anything they do. The real problem is how we&#x27;ve let these companies infiltrate so much of our society so fast. I can&#x27;t consume any ad supported media without getting some ad about them. This company really defines the phrase &quot;money talks&quot;

      1. pfisch · 1790711713 · focus · HN ↗

         Is any form of entertainment or art a social good?

         People can get &quot;addicted&quot; 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&#x27;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&#x27;t like them and have decided they are bad.

         Now are you just banning things you don&#x27;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?

         Is it the % of people who show addictive tendencies to a piece of art&#x2F;entertainment how we define if it is good or bad?

         Is the morality of a form of entertainment defined by how many users show problematic consumption habits, such that in some populations an entertainment product is a moral good and in others it isn&#x27;t? Is morality that flexible?

         1. unethical_ban · 1790712685 · focus · HN ↗

            Yes they can be, and gambling is definitely a different psychological mechanism with different financial outcomes than hobbies or collecting.

            1. pfisch · 1790714798 · focus · HN ↗

               f2p games and tv shopping network addictions absolutely leave a significant number of people destitute.

               There are many other hobbies&#x2F;forms of entertainment that can easily consume significant resources and leave some % of their userbase in serious financial trouble&#x2F;ruin their lives.

               Also I&#x27;m not sure it is correct to define morality by trying to connect how expensive a hobby&#x2F;form of entertainment to whether it is immoral.

               1. intended · 1790717021 · focus · HN ↗

                  Not at all in comparison to gambling, and the F2P model is a scourge which gamers themselves pointed out was poisonous. Regulation has increasingly been catching up to it.

                  We have an entire science built around gambling, and we know how to titrate the payoffs and reward schedules to get people increasingly addicted.

                  Our movies&#x2F;stories aren’t actively (yet) changing themselves to maximize their ability to keep you pressing coins into a slot, or when to string you along.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.