Casino games offered on Chatroulette

One of the fascinating things about the internet is the speed with which some new sites take off. One minute, you have this tiresome start-up calling itself Facebook, the next everyone has an account. In this context, the rise (and rise) of Chatroulette is all the more exciting. We've all been chatting and skyping for so long we can't remember. Webcams have been standard pieces of kit, turning up to allow machine-to-machine video conferencing and to show all kinds of interesting activities when they are planted in unexpected places. So adding in the gambling element completes the picture (as it were). At one level, you could describe the site as your chance to meet new people, except these people could be doing absolutely anything when random chance connects you. In a conventional world, everyone participating would sit calmly in front of their PCs, wearing all their clothes and a welcoming smile. Unfortunately, the randomness and anonymity of the system encourages people to slide towards pornography or voyeurism depending on your inclinations. A remarkable number of people seem prepared to get naked and show off their genitals, or dress up as animals or apparently conduct weird social experiments by giving viewers curious instructions. It's the more sane people who hit the news. Ben Folds has been singing us songs, and a new celebrity is running a primitive gambling scam.

Chance can now connect you to a live dealer offering roulette and blackjack. If you are inclined to play, our mystery croupier gives you his PayPal address and, with a deposit made, the game of your choice begins. You can play for as long as you like. If luck is not with you, topping up the PayPal account is quick and easy. But something that should be not unexpected happens if you tire of this amateurish show and ask for your winnings. The croupier reaches for the "Next" button and disappears from your screen. OK, so let's take two steps back. You were prepared to part with your money to a complete stranger. Well, now's your chance to learn all about the PayPal contract. You have a record of the payment(s) made so, in theory, you can get your money back. Although you will look a fool, you could also report this sad episode to your local law enforcement agencies. They would be delighted to spend time tracking down this guy. But there's a much more interesting question to ask.

The majority of jurisdictions around the world regulate gambling. Online casinos must have a licence. So, Chatroulette is allowing someone to run casino games without a licence. In many jurisdictions, this could make Andrey Ternovskiy, Chatroulette's owner, liable to one or more criminal offenses. If our mystery croupier's activities are small scale and PayPal is able to recover most of the money paid into his various accounts, it's unlikely any country will take action against Chatroulette or its owner. But if the volume of pornography rises, the police might get increasingly interested in trying to shut the site down which would also take down these unofficial online casino games and the scammer behind them. There does come a point when, for better or worse, governments step in and take down some of the fun sites. Politicians and moral guardians never seem to have a sense of humor about anything.

Should lawmakers ban smoking in casinos?

This site is not Libertarian but we know what we like about gambling and the experience of going into casinos. While we can all approve of regulations to keep gambling reasonably honest and fair, there comes a point when enough is enough with the lawmaking. Let's take the issue of smoking as an example. Most of us probably believe the science linking tobacco with fatal diseases. Whether you smoke or draw in the smoke second-hand, the risks of cancer and heart disease are even admitted by the tobacco industry. So, on New Year, we all repeat our resolution not to start or to quit. It's all down to us - a personal decision. If we do decide to smoke, this is a "victimless crime". No-one is forcing us to do this and it should not be for the law to get involved in making any part of smoking a crime. There are no laws criminalising overeating even though the obese die younger, or threatening to put alcoholics in jail because they are damaging their livers. People own their own bodies and should be allowed to do what they want with it.

So what do we make of all these laws banning or restricting smoking in public places? There are no federal laws. It all comes down to the lawmakers in each state. Some have fairly comprehensive laws restricting smoking in the workplace. Others go on to include some bars and restaurants. But, so far, most states have avoided any kind of restrictions on the operation of casinos. The consensus view has been to avoid anything that might reduce the revenue from gambling operations. As the recession has taken hold and the tax-take from conventional businesses has fallen, maintaining the flow on money into the state coffers has become even more important. So far, the need for money has outweighed the health concerns. After all, no-one forces people to go to a casino. If you are not a smoker and want to avoid passive smoking, do not go to a casino.

Based on the experience in Atlantic City which went through a two-week ban on smoking, casino operators estimate their gross revenues would drop by more than one-third. Where would these gamblers go to play roulette? There are two obvious alternatives. The Tribal casinos stand outside state laws on smoking, and people can always stay home to gamble online. There are no laws to restrict what people do in the privacy of their own homes. We could also get into a kind of bidding war where some states with high costs on the healthcare front may clamp down on smoking only to find their own citizens drive into neighboring states to play there. That's a double whammy because the lawmaking states lose tax revenue and still have the health costs of treating their citizens who fall ill because of their smoking. There should be federal legislation to replace this current patchwork of different laws. Health is a national priority. Washington should decide the limits on what people should do in public places. As it is, drinking and smoking goes with casino games just like turkey goes with Thanksgiving. Breaking the link is going to make one set of lawmakers really unpopular. Shall we bet on whether federal laws are introduced?

How will live dealing affect online casinos?

Whichever time you look at, there has always been gambling. For example, there is evidence of keno, dice and mahjong being played in Ancient China from 2,000 B.C. onward. Different forms of gaming were also a popular pastime in the other major ancient civilizations of India, Egypt, Persia, Greece and Rome. Despite attempts to ban or control gambling because of its addictive nature, it has persisted until today. Sometimes it went underground, while other governments allowed commercialisation. Throughout, gambling has been seen as a social activity. The rich would gather in each others palaces and mansions to play or attend exclusive clubs. The poor would flock to "dens of iniquity" which were often run by criminal gangs tied into the worlds of prostitution and street drugs. This history is one long transfer of wealth from one individual to another. Before regulation, it was usually the criminal gangs that became rich. After regulation, those in positions of power took their commissions while governments subsidized the taxpayers through levies and taxes. But there was one constant thread. Whether you were an aristocrat lounging in a casino in an exclusive spa town in Europe or panning for gold in the 1840's and 50's, the majority of games depended on live dealing or the supervision of the betting by an employee of the House. In the more modern clubs and casinos, the dealers and croupiers have often been beautiful women, dressed attractively. In their own right, they were part of the attraction of the "place". The men would come, leaving their wives at home, to lose their money while ogling the girls.

Then along came the internet. There is nothing wrong with the quality of the graphics, animation and soundtrack. In most cases, they represent a brave attempt to create an experience similar to a real-world casino. But players can never suspend disbelief. They continue to sit at home or nursing their laptops in a hotspot with their attention fixed on a small screen. Nothing can replace the smell, noise and crush of people in a casino. Except, as the technology has matured and bandwidth improved, online casinos have begun to introduce live dealers for a range of your favorite casino games. This has two advantages. Many people prefer to avoid the random number generators that drive the software versions of the games. RGNs are too perfect. They feel it is better to gamble where human beings shuffle the packs or spin the wheels because human beings make mistakes and are inefficient. Secondly, animations only go so far. Even though it is a small screen, a live video feed of a sexy lady dealing blackjack or running a roulette table brings in the business.

Live dealing has been increasingly common on sites serving Europe but the first online casinos in the US are now recruiting live dealers and launching their own service. You can only go so far to compete on animation and welcome bonuses. Web cameras are cheap and not much of a studio is required to create interactive play between dealer and you sitting at home. With your favorite casino games now coming to you live, the pressure will be on the majority of the other casinos to innovate ad improve the interface and user experience. As bandwidth improves, your gaming experience will improve.c

Slots can make you rich unless there's a glitch

OK, so here's a question for everyone who has ever been into a casino to play a slot machine or who has played online. Why did you do it? The answers will all have differences in the detail, but the simple truth is easy to write. You want to win some money. There's this machine. It's got a simple system for deciding when you win. In old technology, there were physical reels turning. Now we have video technology. You get to see the representation of the different characters turning. There's an air of breathless excitement. You watch the key numbers or symbols pass ever more slowly in front of your eyes. Just one or two more turns and you'll hit the jackpot. Ah, so close! You were within touching distance of millions of dollars. If only you'd been able to reach out with your mind to just push one wheel through one more turn to the pay line. But the fact you did come so close means you could win next time. If your luck is in. And the stake for each spin of the virtual wheels is so small. And the winnings are so much, they will clear all your losses to date and leave you with cash in hand. Some of those combinations make you rich. But then there are the few combinations that make you even richer. And then there's the jackpot itself. Your heart races and you think what you could do with that big a pile of cash. Yes, your answers would be something like that - it' exciting to anticipate a win.

So let's all have a moment of sympathy for Louise Chavez. She's a resident of Denver, but was visiting Central City, Colorado. Having taken in the local scenery, she had settled into The Fortune Valley Casino. The slot machines were all lined up and she was ready to hit the big time. Time passed and then came the experience everyone dreams about. The reels settled into place and the light on top of the machine lit up. As every player knows, this tells you and everyone watching you have just picked up the jackpot. In this case, she imagined she had won the Phantom Jackpot which was standing at a mere $43 million. The other players gathered round. Casino employees rushed over. And Louise Chavez was partying. It was her birthday and she had just been given the very bestest present in the world.

That's why she was more than a little angry when the casino told her there was a computer glitch. She had not actually won anything. That's a rapid makeover from multimillionaire to a big zero in one sentence. Now let's be honest. It's always possible for a computer to foul up. There are all these lines of code and, at any time, one of them can just decide to play a game with our heads. It doesn't matter whether you're in the real world or playing slots online, a machine error can catch you out. What makes this interesting is the idea of a "phantom" jackpot. The pay lines for conventional slots are always clear. Are the rules for winning phantom jackpots always so clear? Presumably the state gaming officials will publish a report and confirm this phantom jackpot system is fair, can be won and is not a scam. No matter where you play slots, you always need confidence the computers are programmed to give you a fair chance of winning. As it stands, this is a PR disaster for the casino.

The slots operators are threatening to sue

Just as we all used to follow the form of horses - think the Great Depression and the success of Seabiscuit to see we all love a champion - the latest form book covers the race among US states to balance their budgets. Of course, everyone has been focussing on California with Arnold Schwarzenegger leading the charge to the winning post on getting the budget signed into law. He has enough strength for arm twisting and 'gator wrassling to bulldoze the bill through. But Pennsylvania is just as interesting with the Governor's office matching California's use of IOUs by refusing to pay funds to the four state universities. Probably someone somewhere is running a book on which US state will be the first to declare itself bankrupt. These would be the front runners among an alarming number of states lacking initial prudence and the political will to raise taxes, to cut spending, or both.

Anyway, the real point of interest in Pennsylvania is the growing threat of litigation from the group of license holders who run slot machines. When the licenses were first issued, the state sold maximum exclusivity for a high fee (that's $50 million a license). The enabling law is very clear. No other gambling outlet will be allowed to compete directly with the market for slot machines. At the time, this looked a good deal for both sides. Gambling was a popular activity and the state benefited from a generous input to its finances. Fast forward and the recession has forced people to cut back on their discretionary spending. This means less money to spend on trips to gamble. Ironically, the casino operators to benefit from this have been online. Had it not been for the changes in the law making it difficult to move money into and out of the online casino accounts, they would have cleaned up. So this leaves the current license holders under pressure with building work on some of the proposed casino and resort sites put on hold. While the government finds an expanding black hole eating up its cash reserves as tax revenue falls. The state's answer is proposals to increase the number of slot machines allowed in the existing resorts and to license new resorts. To the existing license holders, this looks like plans to allow direct competition from new operators. They are up in arms with their attorneys slavering on the end of a short leash, just waiting for the chance to sue.

There's no doubt slots still represents a pot of gold for both the license holders and the state. The machines are still a big draw even though the recession is biting hard. But this plan looks like an expansion too far. The average spend has dropped. If the state increases the number of machines, this will only spread the same amount of money around more machines. It's not going to increase the size of the spend. This leaves the state with a growing hole in its accounts and the existing license holders with a good case in contract and constitutional law. With the online casinos introducing new slots games every month and keeping up player interest, this is no time to be fighting over a reducing market in the real world.