Maybe this is a moral failing on my part, but I am still trying to figure out what was "wrong" about this. They found a bug. They exploited it. They asked other casinos to enable a function that allowed them to exploit it, but it was still a valid configuration for the game.
To me this sounds like IGT should have lost their shirts, but instead the NGC, local police and the IRS can recoup the loss from the individual and emerge unscathed?
I still cant see how this is wrong. But then again I think if you are good enough to count cards in blackjack you should be able to profit as well...
If he found a flaw in the poker simulation, I would agree with you. Cases like that have come up.
But instead he's retroactively changing the size of his bets. He plays the machine so he wins $50 then uses the bug to change the payout to $5000. It's like writing extra 0s on a check someone gave you.
It's an interesting bug, but I don't think he deserves his winnings. He was clearly playing outside the game and cheating.
That said he did NOT deserve to be SWATed. That's a massive overreaction.
Well, if you found a bug that allowed you to log into someone else's bank account and remit all their money to your own account, would exploiting it be right?
The OP's argument is that exploiting a bug for financial gain is not wrong which is not so different from saying exploiting a faulty lock to steal is the locksmith's fault.
joezydeco's comments elsewhere in this thread are dead-on, but the short version is that there are specific gambling laws and regulations which prohibit this sort of thing. Something along the lines of "It is hereby illegal to find a bug in a gambling machine and exploit it." but with more legalese.
To me this sounds like IGT should have lost their shirts, but instead the NGC, local police and the IRS can recoup the loss from the individual and emerge unscathed?
I still cant see how this is wrong. But then again I think if you are good enough to count cards in blackjack you should be able to profit as well...