[saraid216]

You realize that is a bet on the fact that I'll lose, right? What makes you think that my luck wouldn't apply to that?

I recognize that you think I'm stupid, and I recognize that I haven't actually provided you with the hard data. But I'm not sure how that justifies trying to use someone's depression as a tool for profit.

Are you this much of a dick to everyone? Or am I just unlucky?

[kybernetikos]

I believe in testing things. I don't expect it to work since I assume that it's much more likely you fall within the normal range of luck, but I think doing the experiment would be interesting.

The central point is that if you have an unusual source of information about chance outcomes, even if it's negative, there should be a way to use that to gain.

If you think that the universe can make sure you don't gain financially from chance you could try a test that pits some other kind of gain against financial gain and see which way the universe goes. Some people bet against their favourite sports team so that whatever the result, at least some good will come of it.

Sorry to hear you're depressed.

[saraid216]

I'm a web developer. In terms of luck, that's a pretty high water mark for financial gain.

You believe in testing things, and for some reason, you don't seem to consider the many games I've played with luck components to be tests, but somehow gambling is a legitimate test because money is involved? Why?

> The central point is that if you have an unusual source of information about chance outcomes, even if it's negative, there should be a way to use that to gain.

I do gain. I learned not to play games that depend on luck. I learned that deliberately subjecting myself to depressing situations was not conducive to mental health.

[kybernetikos]

It sounds like this is not a healthy approach for you, so I retract my suggestion. I will defend it somewhat though, hopefully to give you an idea why I immediately started thinking along those lines:

> You believe in testing things, and for some reason, you don't seem to consider the many games I've played with luck components to be tests, but somehow gambling is a legitimate test because money is involved? Why?

Actually, it's more that the gambling scenario brings in an extra level. Learning what the universe is like is usually very useful. If I thought that the universe were against me in games of chance, there would be a whole load of follow up questions - is it just me, or are there others like me? How many? Are there others opposite to me? How would it work if I followed a lucky persons bets? How predictable is its behavior? Does the effect get stronger with larger amounts wagered? What are it's limitations? Can it identify schemes at one level removed? If they go wrong, do they go wrong because I start winning at the game, or because of higher level scenarios (like the friend I trusted reneges on the deal)? Is my knowledge of the scheme important? What if the friend chooses on a case by case basis whether to mimic me or to oppose me and I don't know which they will do?

One of the first few things I would try, would be to try to trick the effect somehow, leading to the friend/casino scenario I suggested. The money aspect is not to cause the test to be legitimate, but as an extra incentive to myself to seek the truth of the matter. This wouldn't work with everyone, and may not work with you, but I think it would help me stay objective.

Anyway, particularly if you find yourself with mental health concerns, avoiding games of chance (and particularly those involving money) is probably wise. The only reason I've continued with this discussion so far, is because you seem to have mistaken my enthusiasm for testing outlandish claims with baiting, and I'm trying to explain that that isn't it at all.