Again though, I couldn’t use that argument in the real world it doesn’t fit with gambling regulation.
You’re reaching, in my view. Yes, it can be construed, or rather misconstrued in the way you put it, until any decent lawyer beats it. How do you know there aren’t existing systems just like Cardano in existence that rely on random selection to ensure integrity of their systems?
Like I said, this is now becoming entirely a what-if / crystal ball /hypotheticals type of discussion which I don’t indulge in for longer than I just did… however I do find they have merit. So what I usually do is I make a small bet with whomever is arguing… and I usually don’t bet unless I am sure I am going to win. So we can place a long bet if you’re atill alive, say 1, 2, 5 or 10 years, and if what you claim has come to pass, I will pay you USD $100. if it hasn’t, you will pay me USD $100. Do you accept?
1 Like
Is it a legal bet 
Happy to bet, but its not something I’m bothered about winning.
I just think that if this could even cause problems down the line then why not fix it? The ripples that could be caused by being classed as an illegal lottery would be based on pedantic reasoning but could have a huge impact, as mentioned though not all negative either ie for tax purposes which would be very beneficial for ADA and give extra reason for investors to invest.
Edit - beneficial for tax purposes if fixed and made into a skill based game.
Neither am I, it’s not aboit winning. Merely that I see your point as valid however anyone attempting to subvert a greater good (IMHO) like Cardano based on some detail taken out of context/misconstrued… feels to me like letting off a bona-fide murderer get off scot free because he wasn’t mirandized by the arresting officer… that’s called a perversion of justice, and it has happened, which is why I am betting, because justice is kind of slow to work… but in the end it prevails every time. And I know what CH/IOHK/CF, based on their words, believe in - which is why I am confident they will prevail if a case such as the one you describe were ever to be litigated in court against them.
Agreed, but the shouldn’t a blockchain remain autonomous and separate from lawsuits and regulation, isn’t that the most optimal method of growth?
As mentioned, if a simple solution could give absolute clarity to this issue, such as when you login to your wallet you just pick a random dot in a pixel field, and this represents your skill based decision isn’t that a worthy trade off?
Also, if through doing that you simultaneously wiped any tax liability off ADA investors rewards isn’t that alone a really strong incentive?
My preference would be to have this absolutely water tight and solve a problem that others might trip up on.
I found this which was interesting regarding your comment about religions:
I’m not sure how random that approach is… and now some a-hole lawyer can claim your seed selection skill is no skill at all. There will probably be something that says skill requires you are able to reasonably reproduce outcomes… try arguing that to a judge or a jury. I prefer the ‘randomness as necessity to insure integrity of the system as a whole’ argument. Of course, to Joe Sixpack and Jane the Nurse, you may have to phrase it in a way they get it… this is why software engineers don’t get paid 400-500 per hour yet 
Exactly my point, its negative sentiment that imo can be avoided.
I spoke with Aggelos around 12 months ago and one of the first thing he asked is if what I was doing was legal regarding a skill based game I had just conducted, and I didn’t consider it in terms of Blockchain and ADA and perhaps he hadn’t. With Blockchain becoming more of a regular thing, maybe the shifting context will make these laws more relevant.
Spot the ball is highly established as using skill globally even though the level of skill is next to zero, I guess its a legal loophole of sorts.
wait how did you go from spot the ball to picking a random pixel? Or were you talking about this game you were conducting? I had to Google “spot the ball”, and yes, I’ve played such games or similar (‘detective’) games on my Pixel phone where picking off details on an image has you progress through the game… kind of fun but gets old quickly.
Spot the ball is essentially pick a random pixel, there is no ball and never was, a committee just decides on the most likely position of the “ball”. In addition it doesn’t need to be a ball, it could be any subject matter that you need to pick the location of and a committee verifies the winner. So I was using shorthand for a system that would be spot the ball but adapted for a wallet with a simple streamlined approach eg Spot the node. This could then generate an additional key to work in conjunction with or on top of your ADA.
Just realised what you mention there isn’t spot the ball, that sounds more like a game.
Ok, thanks for clarifying - apparently you meant something else altogeher
So your method would generate the seed by picking a random pixel on, say, a 4K screen, versus some PRNG on your PC/phone generating that number? I’m just hard pressed to see how you can argue skill in selecting a random pixel … but like I said, I’m no lawyer, and maybe it can be argued that way.
This explains the basic process -
https://spotandwin.co.uk/how-to-play-spot-the-ball
These are the legal definitions -
I think this could be adapted to be appropriate to ADA whilst retaining the correct legal properties.
So I select a pixel that is the ‘missing ball’, the ‘committee’ verifies my answer, and that ‘skill-based’ pixel then becomes the seed value for the winner selection process? Does that sum it up?
Yeah that’s pretty much it. It is probably the simplest mode of adding a skill element and could hopefully be presented as a seamless and more arbitrary click. Beyond this you need to start exploring questions as a skill based answer or text that is judged on its merit.
So, what would be the implication if the reward mechanism were judged to be gambling? This would only apply if the node (or the stake delegater?) were in certain countries?
Is it the pool selection step that is important because we are accepting that running a node has skill involved already? Where and why do you need this “spot the ball” like element?
Provided this committee is an automated process… and not a human approval, which I’m guessing is part of your assumption, I don’t see why this couldn’t be worked in as a scheme just as well. My only question then is, what does it take to subvert your scheme and break the system… as opposed to a PRNG based one…?
https://cardanodocs.com/cardano/proof-of-stake/#follow-the-satoshi
https://cardanodocs.com/technical/leader-selection/
I think, if I am reading jellylo right, he needs the seed for the FTS algorithm to be generated via ‘skill’. Currently these are random generated numbers generated via “MPC” (per the docs). Or perhaps I should say ‘random enough’. True randomness I think can only be gotten from things like monitoring/digitizing (ADC) cosmic background radiation … or the frequency of radioactive decay of e.g. cesium (HotBits Hardware). A computer cannot by definition generate random numbers…so they employ seeded PRNGs which give you something which is statistically indistinguishable from random numbers in appearance but they aren’t genuinely random. A true RNG has to rely on some physical process, usually occurring in nature… The way rng is done in apps is they typically will use a true RNG for the seed (/dev/random) and then PRNG the rest (/dev/urandom).
Its difficult to understand the potential implications on a global group of participants but as per the visa example this could limit payments to purchase ADA when that is a thing as it would constitute a gambling purchase.
Here is a doc on geo laws -
https://www.dlapiperintelligence.com/prizepromotions/insight/index.html?t=skills-competitions
My opinion on use would be to try and align a single action on the first instance of opening a wallet that would hopefully constitute your further interactions in the eco-system as based on skill. Legal clarity would be required to ensure each step is robust enough to meet the gaming criteria.