That's either going to be a lot of fun or a spectacular mess. I'm thinking more likely the latter. Ian Fleming must be rolling in his grave.
Same. I haven't seen one since the first Pierce Brosnan Bond flick. Even the Daniel Craig ones, and I like Daniel Craig. I share Tom Nichols' view on Bond movies: "Bond, created by Ian Fleming, is forever frozen in time as an aspiring white male elitist of the old British establishment. In the books and the better entries in the films, he’s a hero you can admire only with serious reservations."
I was dubious of this idea at first, but I heard something on a podcast that makes me hope Nolan can pull it off. (This also involves things that one might only know if they read the books.) Anyway, on this podcast they were talking about how all the idle rich guys in England in the 50s & 60s blew all their money. It was by playing Chemin de fer Baccarat. Apparently, it's a really fast version of baccarat, chance plays a huge part in the game, and former heroin addicts have described the game as being more addictive than smack. In, at least some of the books, how Fleming shows that Bond is beyond the ken of mortal men, is that he wins at baccarat. So, here's what I'm thinking: Given Nolan's obsession with sticking to details, we're going to see Bond playing baccarat in some of the movies. All the tech bros are going to want to be like Classic Bond (as opposed to New Bond or Bond II), so, naturally, they're going to want to take up baccarat, and eventually, Chemin de fer. Which means a lot of those fuckers will be bled dry. That's totes awesome, IMHO.
So given house limits do you think Elon loses more per month on Baccarat or buying twitter. Place your bets people. I am sure WF will cover them all in gold pressed latinum.
You know, unlike poker, where skill can have a large impact. A skilled poker player can be dealt a shitty hand and still win the game by bluffing.
I know the case law says that poker is a game of "skill". I disagree. There may be some "skill" in the bluffing, but at the end of the day the outcome is entirely dependent on the random shuffle and draw of 52 cards. Also, unlike every other casino game, poker is peer-to-peer, which means you're not playing against the house. Baccarat (whatever variation) is entirely chance. It's actually one of the few casino games where you literally do not need to understand the rules or know how to play, and you'll still have a 50/50 chance of winning. You pay a "commission" when the house wins, which is how the casino makes its money.
I would imagine a Nolan Bond movie would once again revolve around time. Maybe not,”you’ve got this amount of time before I blow up X”, but something like that, just more sophisticated.
Elon strikes me more like the shit-eating little prick from Never Say Never Again who plays the arcade wargame against Bond only to get the shit shocked out of him.
There are other ways that skill factors into poker, including but not limited to: 1. The ability to read whether or not other players are bluffing, what sorts of hands they might have, how likely it is that they might have those hands based on various factors (their betting history in the particular hand, their demeanor, how they have behaved in previous hands, etc.) 2. The ability to minimize your own tells or to give misleading impressions to other players through your body language and statements 3. The ability to decide when to bet and what size bet to make in order to attempt to achieve different goals (maximizing the pot when you have a strong hand, inducing bluffs from opponents, minimizing exposure on draws etc) 4. Estimating things like pot odds
I’m so glad you found a podcast to tell you what to think about the prospect of Nolan doing a Bond movie.
It didn’t say anything about Bond or Nolan. Or even Ian Fleming. It was a podcast talking about class and social structures in the UK from the 1930s until the 1960s. I happened to remember a few bits of trivia about Fleming and Bond that snapped into place as I listened to it. The podcast didn’t even mention that the game was a version of baccarat. I had to track that down on my own. Do you ever do anything like that while you’re watching your YT videos?
Actually, I am a court-certified expert on gambling but I'll just leave it at that. As I said, the case law certainly disagrees with my assessment. I don't necessarily disagree with some of the things @Raoul the Red Shirt says, but where we likely diverge (and where the poker industry has been able to bamboozle the courts) is that I'm of the view it's still a game of chance because at the end of day it still comes down to the draw. You can be the best bluffer in the world and none of that will matter if your opponent got a lucky deal and is holding a straight flush or four-of-a-kind. I may be a skilled marksman but if I'm handed an unloaded gun I ain't hitting jack shit. Also, a lot of the "skill" argument could easily apply to games like Blackjack (i.e., card-counting is a skill) but that game is considered a game of chance. Anyway, take it from me: gambling is a dumb past-time.
Yes, when watching YouTube videos or listening to podcasts I often look up the things that they are talking about so that if I want to bring it up to my friends I can at least know a little about it. When I bring it up here I’m often accused of not being able to think for myself or that they are doing the thinking for me.
Nothing less than telling you you're brilliant is going to stop your butt-hurt, is it? Keep starving then.
The only laws I care about when it comes to gambling are those to be found in the branch of mathematics known as game theory. A skilled marksman will know what an unloaded gun feels like, without having to remove the clip. A skilled marksman will know to check the cylinder for bullets. I can't find it now, but one of the mid-range newsish magazines (Think Wired, The Atlantic, or something along those lines, not a really dedicated news magazine like Time, the only articles I can find at the moment that talk about the guy are paywalled. His name, I believe is Niko Tosa.) did a piece recently on a guy who led a gambling crew that found themselves banned from casino after casino. The crew didn't win every time they played their favorite game, but they won enough that it caused the casinos to ban them because they were doing better than what the odds said that they should. The game? Roulette. The reporter who wrote the piece finally tracked down the guy who led the crew after he'd been banned from just about every major casino in the world, save for a couple in Africa. He got the guy to spill his secrets. Mind you, this guy and his crew had been shaken down by any number of casino thugs to see if he was carrying any kind of device that would somehow enable him to cheat at roulette, and they also checked out the dealers. You want to know what his secret was? He figured out that on older roulette wheels the marks where the ball would tend to land most often were visible. Once he knew that, it was enough information to give him and his crew the kind of edge that they needed to beat the odds. Assuming he's telling the truth, that's a skill.
1.) Because many times in the past when we've asked you for your thoughts on a particular subject you responded with "Here's a link to a video by so-and-so that I agree with." Which doesn't answer the question, regardless of who might have made the video. 2. As you continue to demonstrate in this thread, if someone can actually get you to respond to a question, you provide an answer that leads to more questions, and when asked about those, you complain about people being too wordy. If you seriously want to have a discussion on a topic, then you need to be prepared to read a lot of words here. (I'll note that you can't seem to trim down my posts to give an example of how I should rephrase them. Almost as if your brain has a stack overflow error once it hits 280 characters. Which is how many are in a tweet.)
You know how you do the quote separation thing? You know how much of a pain in the ass it is to do on your phone? You know much it is to do it on your phone at work when your boss thinks that you should be constantly working because there’s always something to even though there isn’t so you get bored and look at your phone, but you are in a hurry because you don’t want your boss to see you on your phone? Now try doing that when you’re busy. I could do it on my laptop when I get home, but a lot of the times by the time I get home I forgot what I was going to say.
At this point Snyder owes the world a few redemptive good movies before he's allowed near a franchise. He could probably have done a great Bond movie in the 60s with all the slow motion and sexual assaulting, you can certainly imagine Connery booting someone into a pit screaming "I. Am. 007!" before getting clam grab happy with some barely legal and protesting scantily clad models. Bond is pretty much the archetype of stale, male and pale, and, in an era which Connery may very well have described as "buftie", needs handling with better care than Snyder has shown with his characters of late.
