BobP makes an excellent point.

The problem with the "Dollar Diet" is that you will never be able to get enough people to pull together to make a difference. While the majority might believe in the cause, or at least its principles, they would rather let others put forth the actual effort to change things. A good example of this would be the dismal voter turnout we see in every election in this country. The non-voters complain about the state of the nation as much, or more, than the voters do, and claim they're protesting current conditions by withholding their votes (Yeah, that'll show 'em). 

Then you have the die-hards that just refuse to believe the facts. These people believe that, if they don't see the gun that's pointed at their heads, they can't be harmed by its bullets, so they just turn their heads and pretend that nothing is happening, all the while trying to convince everyone else that they aren't really seeing what they're looking at. These same people, generally speaking, will accept, and vehemently defend, such abstract concepts as life after death, psychics, reincarnation or ESP, and watch professional wrestling on Pay-Per-View.

A word of caution, however. Your lottery director serves at the behest of the governor who appointed him, and that of the lottery commission who employs him. If you really want to make a difference, write directly to your governor - flood his mansion with letters, and make certain to remind him of how Arnold Swarzenegger attained his current position. Recall elections are not exclusive to California...

It should be obvious, given the tremendous revenues generated by state lotteries, that an extremely powerful lobby could be created by the lottery players in this country. Until more players figure that out for themselves, we're going to have to muddle through as best we can.

smd173:

You don't appreciate my sarcasm, but you should appreciate it, because the rules dictate that I cannot use my Navy vocabulary on this forum to give you the dressing down you had coming. If you didn't want, or didn't expect me to defend myself, you had no business climbing into the ring. 

Ignorance has a price, my friend, and you just made a down payment. You're a Top 100 Poster, and to calim that you were not aware of what LosingJeff and I have presented on this forum over the past fourteen months is, at best, difficult to believe. See, THAT is a weak argument. While we're on the subject, you can't "guarantee" any such outcome, as you still haven't bothered to educate yourself on the issue at hand, preferring instead to attack legitimate and valid points that have been plastered all over this site and others. You have an annoying habit of presenting your opinions as hard facts.

You took it upon yourself to proclaim to the entire world that our arguments were weak because you didn't see something or other. You didn't bother to ask for evidence; you didn't bother reading other posts on the subject, including a newspaper article that's been posted here since June 20th. You read a few words on one page, formed and then posted an expert opinion based on those few words, and now you're crying because I came out swinging when you backed me into a corner.

I will defend to the death the evidence I have on this issue, and ANYONE who challenges that evidence had better have something solid to back it up. If you, have evidence that counters mine, I would be happy to consider it, but I won't waste my time if it's no more substantial than the fact that you "don't see it."

You got what you deserved, and I will not apologize.

Go ahead and punish me by not signing the petition. I'm confident I will soon recover from this crippling blow, although I can't understand why you would kick yourself in the groin in an attempt to hurt me. The problems you're currently facing with your state lottery have already run their course in mine. The difference is, I know what's coming next to Pennsylvania's lottery, but you already have that figured out, don't you?

Jim,

I don't want an apology from you.

I just want you to realize that you could have made your point to me in a much more proactive way. All you had to do was say, "smd, I did the research and found out x, y, and z in Indiana and you are off base with your comments." And that would have made your point. Instead, you launch into a tirade like I personally attacked you. That was never my intention.  

I'm sure your petition will not be crippled by me not signing it. However, I would have signed it. So you have one less name on there.

smd173,

I am the one who put together all the wording that appears on this site.  Not Jim.  If you have some criticisms of the wording, please direct them at me.

I happen to agree with Jim that you should not attack something as "weak", unless you state good reasons for doing so.

This is a very important topic, and I would ask that if you're going to throw out blanket statements, that you PM me with them instead of muddying the waters.

Regarding hacking or meddling:

I don't think the problem is that somebody will get in over the Internet and mess with the way the computer selects numbers. However, I could today get a job with the company that makes the computers, and I could make sure that on any future date, years out, say December 28, 2009, a specific set of numbers is drawn. Then I have 5 years to find myself a trusted buddy who will play those numbers for me, and we're off to the Bahamas.

It's not easy to do that, but given enough time, I believe I could do it, and nobody would know, afterwards, that it was me that did it, or how it got there. The only problem is that they'll probably update the machine or software version often enough....

There are challenges, but it could be done, by an insider. And that alone is reason enough to ban the method.

I am the one who put together all the wording that appears on this site.  Not Jim.  If you have some criticisms of the wording, please direct them at me.

• 
  
• I never had a problem with the wording of what you wrote Todd. So I don't even know why you brought that up.

I happen to agree with Jim that you should not attack something as "weak", unless you state good reasons for doing so.

• 
  
• It was my OPINION that your argument for banning RNG's based on hacking was weak. My reason WAS stated. I said because I don't believe that a state lottery would hook the RNG up to a network that could be hacked. Jim has evidence that shows the Hoosier Lottery does have the RNG hooked up in a fashion where it could be hacked. So my opinion was proven WRONG. That doesn't make it invalid for me to have posted it. This forum is here to promote discussion.

This is a very important topic, and I would ask that if you're going to throw out blanket statements, that you PM me with them instead of muddying the waters.

• 
  
• So whenever a topic is important to you, no one should post anything that would go against your arguments because that should just be handled in private? Isn't this a forum where everyone is free to post their opinions and debate issues?

 

You sound upset.  Let's not keep going in this negative direction.  Let's rally around the need to eliminate computerized drawings in every state, and prdvent your state from going to computerized drawings (if it has not already).

Sign the petition!

Tood = I havnt read the petition so my thinking of "inside job" came naturally as I didnt see any reason that a Lottery Commision would/should have their computer hooked up in such a way that it could be hacked from outside sources.  One would think that such people would consider the possibilities of such if the computer wasnt isolated and take precautions to prdvent such occurences which I feel is a very reasonable assumption.

I believe I did say that I absolutely feel the people have a right to "see" the numbers drawn.  Other then that I dont have a problem with computerized generations as the system I use to determine what to play isnt adversley effected by computerized drawings.

This is similar to electronic voting machines fraud.  Theoretically both lotteries and electronic voting can be done in a solid way to prdvent fraud, hacking and other unfair criminal activities, but in both cases the stakes are so high for those wanting power and money that you have to assume if there is a flaw or weakness or programmer's backdoor that can be exploited to tip the scales it will be done and the public will be screwed. Those who program the computers really don't have a strong incentive to make sure the systems are rock solid and hack proof, both from the inside and the outside - in fact it seems they often only want an appearance of propriety while allowing access or insider knowledge to the special few.  In computers, so much is hidden and a few lines of code among thousands can spell fraud and cheating.  

Alleged correct votes appear, they say "trust us"; alleged random numbers pop up, they say "trust us."  Well, we can vote on paper ballots and we can have easily checked ping pong balls provide the random numbers, then we won't have to trust them. 

Vote by absentee ballot whereever electronic voting machines are in use, and boycott all lottery games that chose numbers by computer.

I've read all the comments and have not found a single comment referring to "wireless internet."

If someone can sit the coliseum in Italy and check their email with a wireless computer, what would stop a lottery official from accessing a remote lottery computer and doing all sorts of mischief to increase lottery profits?

Just a thought.

bobby623,

Yes, you're right.  That's one of a thousand different scenarios where the computers could be compromised.  And that's the point.  Why even go through this mess, introducing all kinds of risk and ill feelings, when the cost savings is insignificant or non-existant?

I don't know if this is possible or not. A few years ago I had a friend tell me this. He said a hacker who has the right codes can hack into a computer even when the power is off not disconnected from the power cord just turned off. He said that they connect through the modem and turn the computer on steal what information their after and shut the computer down. I never hear anyone else tell me this little tidbit but I suppose it's possible. Who knows. Ever since he told me that I usually unplug the cable modem cord. Now if this is a true statement dsl, cable, and wireless access might be just as easy to hack.

four4me,

For regular PCs, that's really not possible, because modern modems rely on your computer's CPU and memory to do anything.  If the power's off, there will be no problems.

Even if they could get in somehow, the lack of power would make the hard drive and memory inaccessible, so they could see or do nothing.

You don't need to unplug your modem anymore.

The only exception I know of is that some servers have a special card inside them that is connected to the network, and allows someone to logon to the card, even when the server is turned off.  This allows them to turn the server on remotely, as well as monitor its temperature and if it's been tampered with.  The card still does not give access to the hard drive or memory, becuase those things require power.

can't believe todd you started this petition balls have no patterns

or bais were as the computer does produce patterns..like here in calif

3 and 1 are sticking together..also 0 and 7 this is heavy in our!! favor

or course the pick 5 and 6 games are 570,000 to 41 million in one

odds ..we'll never going to hit those games..but are daily games

we're some of us make good money are going to lose!!!!when you

bring back complete random drawings...Is this lottery games just

a hobby for you????if you were playing seriously you would see the

bais in computer games are to the players advantage.....I hope

you rethink this stupid move....

          good luck chris