xbl

But, and I'm totally not disagreeing with anyone here, just enhancing my own knowledge, aren't you expected to analyse the market and make an educated decision, which the bookmakers take account of by offering short odds for obvious favourites? As everyone can probably tell, I'm not really a gambler or familiar with bookies.

So basically, if you start winning stuff on a regular basis, then your account is limited...but if you start losing stuff on a regular basis, then no problem? I'm surprised this is legal to just bar people on what is effectively a whim.

Since this seems to have turned into a general gambling Q&A, I have a question. I've heard before of people who have had lots of accounts closed just because they are up money, is this a common thing? Are bookies allowed to do this, and what is the justification? If people start winning a lot, then do they just get banned from bookies? This seems a little unfair if so!

If I can have one more go at breaking it down (apologies for repetition). In laymans terms (which is all I have knowledge of), something like smoking or heroin sends pleasure signals to the brain, just the same as fatty food, alcohol, and other physical things. Over time with some people, then they get dependent on it, wither it is because of circumstances in their lives, personality quirks, or simple escapism, because they need that good feeling. And to keep the rush and the good feeling going, then they have to keep taking it. This is the physical addiction you are speaking of. Gambling appears to be no different. It sends pleasure signals to the brain, and to feed that fix, you need that excitement and the chance of winning. Neuro-imaging seems to show similar levels of brain activation. If you don't get that fix, then you can't function and you get the withdrawal symptoms like you do with other addictions. Furthermore, problem gamblers take out huge loans, conceal debts from their loved ones, sell their possessions to feed their habit, and beg, steal and lie to get more money to feed that addiction. Just like with something like a heroin addiction. To tie that in with FOBTs (which I should emphasise, I don't have any experience of or strong opinions about), they are particularly designed to stimulate in this kind of way. An instant fix, no waiting, pleasure in the games, and significantly, lots of lowball payouts to encourage you and make people feel even better when they win, but ultimately, hugely costly. ETA, if someone with an actual qualified knowledge can clarify any bollocks I might have talked in this post, or explain it in a better way, feel free!

Im not so sure about that. Shakes, withdrawal symptoms, elevated stress and heartbeat, angst. Ill have a look and see if google has a link, as this isn't my speciality.Eta, it seems those symptoms exist: http://www.dailystrength.org/c/Gambling_Addiction/forum/15927776-withdrawal

Im no expert here, but I can take a shot. Essentially, the effect of something like smoking is to take over the brain so that you can't function without it. It is shown in activations of regions of the brain in neuro imaging scans. Other addictions also show up as taking over the brain in exactly the same way. Including gambling I believe. So your brain is unable to function without its "fix" as the addiction has control over brain activation. It needs its fix to function. It doesn't matter if that fix is nicotine or a bet on something, its a similar effect. Its exactly the same as smoking. All addictions are physical and all addictions are mental.

To be honest, Im not sure you understand addiction. The effect of being addicted to a substance is just like being addicted to something intangible.It still stimulates your brain the same way and it is just as hard to kick, as far as I know. I'm no expert on this, so I can't claim any deep knowledge here though. However, with any physical addiction, the biggest issue is mental, not physical. So I don't see a gambling addiction as any less addictive or serious than (say) smoking, just because you can't physically see what you are doing to your body.

I don't know if its cool to post buzzfeed links on here, but this made me laugh so much! http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/the-dumbest-things-that-have-ever-happened

I love Arcade Fire (I got hooked on Power Out when it was released), but I didn't really enjoy Reflektor all that much (just listened to it there). Seems a bit long and self indulgent tbh. Good start, good end, but doesn't really go anywhere in the middle. Just my views though! I've only been to see them once, and my god they were good. I'm sure most of you will have seen this btw, but in case anyone hasn't here is Wake Up, feat. David Bowie:

I tend to try not to make the explicit like between degree and job, people do that all too often, and I think people should go to uni to learn about something that interests them rather than to get a job. So I'm loathe to criticise on that basis. I don't know enough about the research methods used in sociology to comment on the degree of empirical based study, but at an undergrad level, I see no harm in wanting to learn some theory about people. I imagine many people take psychology for the same reasons. As far as Im concerned, if people are studying something they think is interesting, and helps them develop in terms of knowledge and learning, then I don't see the harm! No, my criticism is saved for the people doing the above type of subjects who don't find it interesting and are pointlessly grinding through it doing the absolute minimum. What is the point of doing it at all?

If its something that people find interesting to study, whats the harm?

There were a number of contrasting witness statements to that I believe. They also told some untruths about how much wine they drank too. Still, it'll provide a bit of attention and get some money to the "Where's Maddy?" fund. I gather they're also bringing out a childrens book of the same name. Sneak Preview:

In fairness to the mccanns, they should be allowed a bit of leeway. Anyone can make a mistake. Perhaps a 3 strikes scheme?

Thats what happens when he's a wafer too long.

At least they'll have some material for their next book.

Sounds exactly what you are doing. You are defending the indefensible.

Just C? As in not C++, C# or Objective C? I'm not familiar with those languages I'm afraid, otherwise I was going to point you to some resources. Sorry I couldn't help!

What programming language are you using?

No, not fair play to him really. Blatant fraud taking money away from those that need it. A student I know got hit with a whole load of unexpected circumstances in one go, and as a result, couldn't cover their rent for a couple of months. He got hardship funding to cover that, which is what it should be for, not so that some rich kid can fiddle the system.

I'd like to go and see her show sometime, she's one of the few female comedians that makes me laugh. Also, she's hot.

You know what I mean though, there is a difference between not finding someone funny, and finding them to be utterly shit atrocious holocausts of human beings!

I'm not a fan of his tv work, but I have to say, I was dragged along to see him live, and he was a lot better than I expected him to be. Not really my cup of tea, but not bad. Bet you all of the above will be described as atrocious, unfunny, utterly shit, etc. by someone.

The good thing about p&b is that every comedian is utterly shit. The only popular ones are the ones that are never on tv and hard to actually see.

What were you thinking? You KNOW what way this is going to go now!

Computing. You know, the cool subject.