Jane's Superhumans

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Then they'd have to do that to every single person that ever gets lucky because they might be a precog. What the maximum number of times you can win? How long does your streak last before you're "blacklisted"? Does it matter how much you win?

Apparently you're not too familiar with modern day Las Vegas casinos. There are already people blacklisted or denied because of cardcounting or seemingly cheating even if it can't be proven. The higher ups have their own ideas on what is too much. I believe the most a person has won in Vegas in a single day is $2 million, though they lost it very quickly. The 'overseers' can tell the difference between a lucky streak and 'something unusual.'

 

You'd end up with allot of people "too" lucky to gamble?

You do realize that Vegas wasn't built on winners, right? Oh, it's 'a lot' not 'allot'.

 

All right then. Accquire money in some other fashion' date=' walk in, bet it all and win big. Spread it around a little. Lose here, win there, become out positive. You've got time. Casino are going to black list all their big winners for being potential precogs?[/quote']

See the above. My suggestion is to watch the Travel Channel when they get on a Vegas/gambling spree and watch those episodes.

 

Also, by the 'calculations' that we're established here, there'd only be 1 in a million people that became supers. That gives roughly 280 in the United States. All 280 won't be precogs. There are 65 powers listed on The Power Table on page 87 of FRed. Even if we drop five powers (like HTH) [makes 60] and add twenty more supers [total 300] in the US, that would average to five people per power, such as Clairsentience. This is further broken down into other dimensions, precog and retrocog. At best, there would be two precogs in the US. And who knows, maybe the retrocog would be a Vegas detective, hired by all the casinos?

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

And the ejected person promptly goes to the media' date=' saying in essence "I was blacklisted for winning," and challenges the casinos' managements to justify their actions.[/quote']

Like I said to Nexus, you apparently aren't aware of how casinos in Vegas are run. To take a real life instance, a card counter was taken to court by a casino years back. The court ruled that card counting was LEGAL, because it only used a person's brain. As long as it just used the person's brain, it wasn't illegal. It was also noted that the casinos had the right to refuse service to anyone. Guess what? Mr. Card Counter is politely refused service at all Las Vegas casinos. Probably Reno and Atlantic City ones, too.

 

The same would be applied here for your precog. Except in this case, the precog -if this was even allowed into the courts- would have wasted money on a very expensive lawyer. Another loss for the precog who should have seen this coming. At least the lawyer doesn't have to tell him the bill. "You do know what the final charge will be, correct?"

 

To sum it up, the precog would be allowed until a certain time, at which he would be most likely barred from all casinos in the US. Now, if your precog became a celebrity figure before going to gamble, then all the casinos would probably be on the lookout to preventing him/her from coming in.

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Yeah' date=' well... I think you all suck! [/quote']

So do I!!! It is agreed upon.

 

Wait -- I don't suck, I inhale.

Wait, not like that.

[Mutant for Hire]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

It's interesting that everyone's latched onto the issue of telepaths and precogs and ignored the much more direct issue of how you handle people who are living weapons on say, commercial airplane flights, going into government buildings and so on, which often have explicit rules about weaponry.

[Phil]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Think it may be the USA bias, but I dont understand the hang-up on Casinos. Pre-cog wants to win some money? Simple. On-line gambling.

 

I could go off now and in just a few hours place numerous bets using various different user IDs at different websites that could accumulate to give me enough money to make me comfortable for life.

 

The problem seems to me to be much wider than most people in this discussion have considered. Superhumans would change EVERYTHING. Every aspect of society, every law regulating human existence would be redundant. Either society, politics and the way we regulate our lives would dramatically change, or supers would be eradicated (the most obvious way of so doing being by early detection and either neutering powers or death). Having said, i dont think any modern government is capable of doing this with 100% accuracy, let alone capable of doing this without word escaping to the public. And the public wouldnt stand it.

 

There would be huge investment in technology that might neutralise super powers, probably above and beyond any drive to hire supers. In an Aberrant world where powers are fuelled from a single source, this might be feasible. In a standard Champions magic-mutant-chemical-divine-robot-alien-demon type setting, it would be impossible.

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

It's interesting that everyone's latched onto the issue of telepaths and precogs and ignored the much more direct issue of how you handle people who are living weapons on say' date=' commercial airplane flights, going into government buildings and so on, which often have explicit rules about weaponry.[/quote']

What, have you never followed a HERO thread before?

 

Seriously, are you going to ban someone with extra limbs from going on an airplane?

 

(I'm guessing you didn't notice my sarcastic response to your last comments.)

 

You'd have maybe four or five people with each listed superpower, unless you're assuming that a vast majority would have death powers.

 

If you're going to assume that someone with the ability to blow up an airplane with their hands is going to be known, I get to follow up that the same person will have flight and not need an airplane. That solves that one.

 

Now, given today's world (because technology hasn't upgraded with this thread), how do you think these paranormals will be detected and singled out? Aside from paranoia.

 

Since the inital subject of the thread (which you also have missed) was about supers in the modern military, I'm going to deduce that if the GOVERNMENT is going to allow supers in the military, then the supers will be allowed in GOVERNMENT buildings for training, and thus not be prohibited.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

It's interesting that everyone's latched onto the issue of telepaths and precogs and ignored the much more direct issue of how you handle people who are living weapons on say' date=' commercial airplane flights, going into government buildings and so on, which often have explicit rules about weaponry.[/quote']

Depends--do power dampeners exist? If so, then you just have 'em put them on, and have a couple air marshals armed with megatasers or similar escort the fella on the flight. Hopefully, the dampeners could be concealed in some way, and the passengers wouldn't freak out. Ditto for the courts and other government buildings.

The operative question is how enforceable a lot of these codes would be, with respect to Avengers-level supers(i.e. 450+ points). I think it'd be kind of like an honor system, and in fact I could see the supers adhering to an honor system wrt each other after a while(e.g., a "Silver Age" code of conduct, to avoid scorched earth conflicts between "good guys" and "bad guys"(bad guys have DNPCs, too)).

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Think it may be the USA bias, but I dont understand the hang-up on Casinos. Pre-cog wants to win some money? Simple. On-line gambling.

 

I could go off now and in just a few hours place numerous bets using various different user IDs at different websites that could accumulate to give me enough money to make me comfortable for life.

Aside from it not being part of the original intention of the thread, but could you make a 250 point super with that ability? Include range (because the game isn't taking place on your computer, just displayed there) and advantages and the extra endurance required.

 

Yes, supers would change everything. Just like horses, automobiles, and planes did. Just like computers and the internet did. If you can assume that a precog will use his/her power for evil, I can say another would use it for good. Or maybe someone with Suppression or Drain. Lots of minor scenarios to nitpick at and it can be done from all directions.

 

I mean, let's say that a super with 250 points now becomes a robber. How are you going to prevent him from robbing banks or armed cars? What laws do you create to prevent him from living with his strength? What about that 250 point brick who is in construction because he's in demand? Or the brick who joins a sports team because they'll pay him better than A-Rod's undeserving salary? What about the brick who wants to be in Hollywood?

 

Or do you just create laws that deal with him committing crimes?

[TheEmerged]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

RE: Random Chance Speaking as someone that hsa been on the losing end of a mathematical "effectively impossible circumstance" -- losing 42 straight rolls in Risk, just because it's unlikely hardly makes it superhuman.

[megaplayboy]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Many governments might conclude that bribing superhumans for their "good citizenship" is ultimately cheaper and more productive than various other forms of coercion. If there's 1000 supers in the US, and they draw a covert stipend of $10 million each, even if they don't actually work for the government, that's probably cheaper than worrying about the effects of a few hundred "rogue" supers on the national security/economy/psyche. Sure, a certain percentage would still act up(and lose the stipend, and probably their personal freedom once caught), but it would be a lot smaller that way, since a lot of crimes are property crimes.

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

If there's 1000 supers in the US' date=' and they draw a covert stipend of $10 million each, even if they don't actually work for the government, that's probably cheaper than worrying about the effects of a few hundred "rogue" supers on the national security/economy/psyche.[/quote']

What the heck??? Did you think about this? Not only are increasing the number of supers given by more than three times, but now you're trying to bankrupt a nation. One THOUSAND supers being paid ten MILLION dollars equals 10,000,000,000, or 10 BILLION DOLLARS. Gee, with that kind of appeasement (yeah, it wouldn't happen here), all the supers in the world are going to apply for US citizenship and then start demanding $10 million, "or else," in a pathetic subtle way. If we take 1 super per million, that gives us nearly 6,000 supers, making 60 BILLION DOLLAR payments. If you increase it like you did (by about 3.5 times), that changes it to 210 BILLION.

 

Sorry, not going to happen.

 

(Then of course, you've created resentment from the "normals.")

[Lightray]

I remain far from convinced that a few hundreds of super-humans will revolutionize the world. Were it a few hundred-thousands, then I'd agree.

 

But, really, why would casinos go to ridiculous measures to deal with the 3-5 precogs in the US? Why would laws need to be enacted for the few dozen mind-readers in the US? Why turn society completely upside down because there might be twenty to fourty super-human equivalents to bazookas getting on planes or walking into courtrooms?

 

It's like living in a flood plain -- sometimes you get wet. Sometimes, a super-human will cause issues. But it's going to be pretty darn rare.

 

Now, the public will want to think that the government is doing something about the "problem" (if it's perceived as a problem). But the changes are more likely to seem big than they are to be big changes. Despite all the talk since 9/11, life has continued more-or-less as it once was. We still fly (the wait at security is just a little more annoying). The US still intervenes in other countries (the countries have just changed). The politicians still demagogue about how society is falling apart...

 

Super-powers will probably be exploited to the benefit of society, but unless there are thousands or tens- or hundreds- of thousands of super-humans that is going to be on a small, individual scale.

[Agent X]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

What the heck??? Did you think about this? Not only are increasing the number of supers given by more than three times, but now you're trying to bankrupt a nation. One THOUSAND supers being paid ten MILLION dollars equals 10,000,000,000, or 10 BILLION DOLLARS. Gee, with that kind of appeasement (yeah, it wouldn't happen here), all the supers in the world are going to apply for US citizenship and then start demanding $10 million, "or else," in a pathetic subtle way. If we take 1 super per million, that gives us nearly 6,000 supers, making 60 BILLION DOLLAR payments. If you increase it like you did (by about 3.5 times), that changes it to 210 BILLION.

 

Sorry, not going to happen.

 

(Then of course, you've created resentment from the "normals.")

U.S. revenues total a little over 2 trillion dollars. The 60 billion dollar figure would represent less than 3 per cent of total revenue. The 210 billion dollar figure (that I believe is an implausible hypothetical even for this hypoethical world) would represent 10 per cent of total revenue. Now, assuming that these supers actually do something to merit their pay, you might very well be making a huge profit on their payment.

 

Imagine how many public works projects could be finished in record time. Imagine how many forest fires could be halted in a day or two instead of weeks.

 

I think this notion is not all that unrealistic. Nations might actively compete to employ supers for military and miscellaneous duties.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

I'm guessing you didn't notice my sarcastic response to your last comments.

 

That was sarcasm? You pegged pretty dead-on how it would work.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Now' date=' given today's world (because technology hasn't upgraded with this thread), how do you think these paranormals will be detected and singled out?[/quote']

 

You say that as though you think it matters. All sorts of unenforceable laws are passed. Paranoia is more than enough justification to prohibit anyone from doing anything, regardless of how impractical it may be to catch anyone. Until fairly recently, it was a felony in Virginia to have other-than-missionary sexual relations with your own spouse in your own bedroom with all of the doors and windows closed.

[Mutant for Hire]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Seriously, are you going to ban someone with extra limbs from going on an airplane?

 

(I'm guessing you didn't notice my sarcastic response to your last comments.)

I noticed the sarcasm. Incidentally, you're still not answering the question. A high percentage of superheroes, as recorded in the comics have energy blasting powers or the ability to shred an airplane with their bare hands (and survive the crash as well). Given the fact that ordinary citizens are not allowed to bring pocket knives onto a plane, how are we going to reconcile that policy with allowing people who are living weapons to board commercial aircraft or enter areas where weapon possession is expressly forbidden.

 

You can keep up with the sarcastic comments and the "why not ban people with extra limbs" comments, but all that means is that you don't have a serious answer to my question. You're not directly answering head on "If we have a guy who's known to be a walking energy cannon, how do weapon ban policies handle him and what are the legal consequences if he's granted exemption?"

You'd have maybe four or five people with each listed superpower, unless you're assuming that a vast majority would have death powers.

You're making assumptions about numbers and distributions that don't necessarily apply. And in any case, one person with an RKA or HKA of sufficient power is enough to cause problems. Especially as it only takes one terrorist paranormal to screw up things for all paranormals.

If you're going to assume that someone with the ability to blow up an airplane with their hands is going to be known, I get to follow up that the same person will have flight and not need an airplane. That solves that one.

Your assumption is far less reasonable than mine. Can you honestly say that in a world where paranormals exist, not one paranormal that has known destructive forces will ever try to board a commercial aircraft or enter some other area where weapon possession is forbidden?

 

My assumption is far more reasonable than yours, in my opinion. I would really like to see your explanation for how all paranormals with serious powers can remain forever secret.

Now, given today's world (because technology hasn't upgraded with this thread), how do you think these paranormals will be detected and singled out? Aside from paranoia.

Other paranormals.

Since the inital subject of the thread (which you also have missed) was about supers in the modern military, I'm going to deduce that if the GOVERNMENT is going to allow supers in the military, then the supers will be allowed in GOVERNMENT buildings for training, and thus not be prohibited.

If the thread is about paranormals in the military, why are we talking about precogs in casinos? The thread has drifted to covering paranormals in society in general and how they would be realistically handled in other ways as well.

[nexus]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Apparently you're not too familiar with modern day Las Vegas casinos. There are already people blacklisted or denied because of cardcounting or seemingly cheating even if it can't be proven. The higher ups have their own ideas on what is too much. I believe the most a person has won in Vegas in a single day is $2 million, though they lost it very quickly. The 'overseers' can tell the difference between a lucky streak and 'something unusual.'

 

Yes, but you're suggesting is going to increase the numbers quite a bit on games where its not even technically possible to cheat, such as roulette if you want to blacklist everyone that has a lucky streak on the wheel for possibly being a precog. And actually, I am very familiar with casinos and also the impact of bad PR on the tourist trade. I've -seen- extremely lucky streaks. The example had a person that won eight times in a row being blacklisted. That is a little extreme...

 

 

You do realize that Vegas wasn't built on winners, right? Oh, it's 'a lot' not 'allot'.

 

No Vegas is built on suckers coming in thinking they can win big by breaking the odds and beating the house. Suckers which are going to be somewhat discouraged when it becomes common policy to actually ban big winners and sometimes deny them their winnings on the very loose premise that they might be using psychic powers to cheat. Big Winners are often treated like practical royalty because they are such publicity goldmines and drag more suckers threw the front door.

 

While your finding ways to criticize minor typos in an attempt to make me look "stupid" you might want to consider my point.

 

See the above. My suggestion is to watch the Travel Channel when they get on a Vegas/gambling spree and watch those episodes.

 

I don't have to watch the Travel Channel. I've actually researched Casinos a bit in the past.

 

Also, by the 'calculations' that we're established here, there'd only be 1 in a million people that became supers. That gives roughly 280 in the United States. All 280 won't be precogs. There are 65 powers listed on The Power Table on page 87 of FRed. Even if we drop five powers (like HTH) [makes 60] and add twenty more supers [total 300] in the US, that would average to five people per power, such as Clairsentience. This is further broken down into other dimensions, precog and retrocog. At best, there would be two precogs in the US. And who knows, maybe the retrocog would be a Vegas detective, hired by all the casinos?

 

When exactly did I talk about armies precogs breaking casinos? I was talking about the example and the rebuttal given. One possible precog walking and winning *8 spins on the Roulette wheel and getting banned for it.

 

*sighs* Perhaps if you'd actually read what I posted instead of went into "Must prove he's less intelligent than me" mode right off the bat you'd see my point.

 

1. Blacklisting isn't going to be an effective deterrant to Precogs "beating" the house if they are in anyway smart. It is a superhuman means of cheating and would require extraordinary means (such as your retrocog suggestion) to counter.

 

That's it. Period.

 

I'm not trying to argue there would instantly be draconian laws against metahumans, that there are millions of gambling addicted Precogs running around, etc. Realistically, I don't think most Casinos would even worry about the possibility unless the world was literally crawling with supers. Hell, if an open super DID come in they'd probably love it for the sheer publicity she'd create.

[nexus]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Aside from it not being part of the original intention of the thread, but could you make a 250 point super with that ability? Include range (because the game isn't taking place on your computer, just displayed there) and advantages and the extra endurance required.

 

If the results are going to displayed on your screen and not just "You Win" "You Lose". You don't need much range to see what is going to be displayed in the next few seconds, IMO. Otherwise you couldn't use Precog to win the lottery because you'd have to be at the site of the drawing or have enough range to reach it.

 

At least thats how it works on the few casino sites I've seen and how I'd run it. If it works differently overall I'd appreciate the information.

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Given the fact that ordinary citizens are not allowed to bring pocket knives onto a plane' date=' how are we going to reconcile that policy with allowing people who are living weapons to board commercial aircraft or enter areas where weapon possession is expressly forbidden.[/quote']

What right is there to prohibit him? None. Is he simply a hazard because he exists? No. If we banned everyone from doing things where there is the possibility of harm coming, we'd have no transportation except foot. Why would a paranormal be banned from an airplane for having the ability (note: not the want) to destroy a flight, when any citizen can do the same thing by sitting next to the emergency exit?

 

You're not directly answering head on "If we have a guy who's known to be a walking energy cannon' date=' how do weapon ban policies handle him and what are the legal consequences if he's granted exemption?"[/quote']

Because there's no legit premis to your argument, aside from paranoia. That, and he's not carrying a weapon. Do you prevent boxers or martial artists from grocery shopping simply because they can beat you up?

 

 

You're making assumptions about numbers and distributions that don't necessarily apply.

I've used numbers from the thread's given information and from FREd.

 

And in any case' date=' one person with an RKA or HKA of sufficient power is enough to cause problems. Especially as it only takes one terrorist paranormal to screw up things for all paranormals.[/quote']

Which is the same analogy of one bad apple ruins for the bunch, but we don't prevent everyone from going everywhere. Heck, despite the fact that terrorism against America has been caused by middle-Eastern men roughly between the ages of 20-50, we're still checking everybody because we ("we" as in the idiots of political correctness) don't want to offend anyone ("anyone" as in those who are suspect).

 

Can you honestly say that in a world where paranormals exist' date=' not one paranormal that has known destructive forces will ever try to board a commercial aircraft or enter some other area where weapon possession is forbidden?[/quote']

Of course they will try to go to these places. My sarcasm is that you're in effect trying to ban their existance simply because they are different. Strange considering your board name.

 

I would really like to see your explanation for how all paranormals with serious powers can remain forever secret.

Do you know what celebrities are doing right now? Doubtful. You can do lots of searches and find out basics of what they may be working on, but you won't know what they're doing now. If you can't figure out what media-pursued celebrities are doing, you won't find out what paranormals are doing either. They don't have to remain forever secret, and I don't believe I ever stated all paranormals would. The closest is saying that mentalists might. And surely you're not going to ban mentalists from life as well?

 

Your solutions seems to apply to the same for criminals on parole. You've found these people guilty of existing, even though they haven't done anything illegal.

 

 

If the thread is about paranormals in the military' date=' why are we talking about precogs in casinos?[/quote']

Thread derailtation.

 

The thread has drifted to covering paranormals in society in general and how they would be realistically handled in other ways as well.

Yep. However, you haven't provided enough of a reason -aside from paranoia- of why the world would be topsy turvy because of supers existing. Heck, maybe the comics have had it correct all along and supers will tend to fight supers and technology will compensate. Life's status quo hasn't changed, merely the scale. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[Lightray]

What right is there to prohibit him? None. Is he simply a hazard because he exists? No. If we banned everyone from doing things where there is the possibility of harm coming' date=' we'd have no transportation except foot. Why would a paranormal be banned from an airplane for having the ability (note: not the want) to destroy a flight, when any citizen can do the same thing by sitting next to the emergency exit?[/quote']

Right. I've suspected all along that comparing super-human with innate powers to terrorist with boxcutter is a poor analogy. Let's try a different one -- where persons are innately hazardous in and of themselves.

 

For example, Toronto had a SARS outbreak not too long ago. There were some travel restrictions imposed because governments had reason to believe that travelers from Toronto could be dangers to others (not because of what they might do, but because of what they were. so to speak). So there were a few more restrictions, people were scrutinized more closely, and if you coughed on an airplane you made everyone nervous.

 

Apply that to super-humans who might spontaneously explode or somesuch on an airplane... I think if you can't detect super-powers, we'd have lists of known super-humans for screeners. There'd be additional hassles to travel, but no outright bar on travel.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Not to derail the derailment or anything, but I was thinking about this Jane's Guide (although it's Blackstone's Guide now, if I recall correctly). The information presented will be that which is available to an interested but not omniscient party, yes? Although I think the idea is interesting, I have to wonder how useful it would be as a real-world game product. That is, I am not sure it would be something I would pay money for. It is one thing for me to buy Conquerers, Killers, and Crooks (which I have), and then change things around or allow my characters to operate on much less information than I (the player) possess. It is another to buy a book which is intentionally incomplete regarding its subject.

 

What I could see this "Blackstone's Guide" being useful for, in the real world, would be as an appendix to a book which provides complete information elsewhere, such as a sourcebook for a supervillain group, or whatnot. The "Blackstone" entries would essentially be what the public knows, or might know, about the subject, and would be at the back of the book, after the full information has all been covered.

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

Yes' date=' but you're suggesting is going to increase the numbers quite a bit on games where its not even technically possible to cheat, such as roulette if you want to blacklist everyone that has a lucky streak on the wheel for possibly being a precog. And actually, I am very familiar with casinos and also the impact of bad PR on the tourist trade. I've -seen- extremely lucky streaks. The example had a person that won eight times in a row being blacklisted. That is a little extreme...[/quote']

And yet Vegas still thrives. It may be extreme, but it is also company policy to come out ahead. And just about all games in casinos have people cheating at them, INCLUDING Roulette. Not by rigging the wheel, but by altering bets. It still happens.

 

 

No Vegas is built on suckers coming in thinking they can win big by breaking the odds and beating the house.

And those suckers would not be winners, correct? My statement stands.

 

 

Suckers which are going to be somewhat discouraged when it becomes common policy to actually ban big winners and sometimes deny them their winnings on the very loose premise that they might be using psychic powers to cheat.

It is already policy, there just aren't psychic powers invovled. It is up to the casinos to decide when enough is enough.

 

 

Big Winners are often treated like practical royalty because they are such publicity goldmines and drag more suckers threw the front door.

Um, not really. Big BETTERS (especially whales) are treated like royalty because they bet big and the casinos win more over time. Most whales do not associate with the 'common rabble' and thus don't draw in big crowds. Some celebrities may be spotted, but the big betting areas are not spotlighted, they're secluded.

 

 

While your finding ways to criticize minor typos in an attempt to make me look "stupid" you might want to consider my point.

Did I really try and make you look stupid? No. A simple observation of the small print coupled with a smiley face should have told you that. It seems to me you're trying to attack me because either I'm correct (or closer to being so than you are) and you don't want to admit it, or your just rude and attempting to project your rudeness onto me.

 

 

I don't have to watch the Travel Channel. I've actually researched Casinos a bit in the past.

Well, my suggestion still stands. I've done both. The information you're speaking of is almost contrary to the way I've seen Vegas run.

 

 

When exactly did I talk about armies precogs breaking casinos?

When did I? When did I say you did? I'm stating by what suggestion we were given in the thread, there would only be about two precogs living in the US. I don't know what conclusion you're jumping to here.

 

*sighs* Perhaps if you'd actually read what I posted instead of went into "Must prove he's less intelligent than me" mode right off the bat you'd see my point.

Maybe if you'd read what I stated instead of assuming I'm trying to prove you're less intelligent, you'd see what I'm referring to.

 

If I was trying to belittle you, I would be stating things such as "It's obvious from your inferior intellect that comprehending the simplistic of life's realizations is beyond the scope of your finite brain cells' attempt at imagination and deduction. Your simpleton appraisals are illadvised in dealing with your betters."

 

See, that would be extremely rude and out of character for me. You're offering your opinions and I'm offering mine. I just happen to believe that you're arguing your side based on the opposite of what is currently happening.

 

1. Blacklisting isn't going to be an effective deterrant to Precogs "beating" the house if they are in anyway smart. It is a superhuman means of cheating and would require extraordinary means (such as your retrocog suggestion) to counter.

Have you seen the History Channel's episodes on the MIT students that beat Vegas? They did it legally and used their brains. However, the Vegas casinos (and then Reno & Atlantic City) banned them. Their winning streak is over, though they are apparently trying to round up more people to do the same. They were smart, but the casinos win over the long run. Will the casinos get their two million dollars back? No. Will they lose another two million to these people? No. Will they be on the lookout for people trying the same thing? Yes.

 

That's it. Period.

Doubtful.

[Jinx999]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

What the heck??? Did you think about this? Not only are increasing the number of supers given by more than three times' date=' but now you're trying to bankrupt a nation. One THOUSAND supers being paid ten MILLION dollars equals 10,000,000,000, or 10 BILLION DOLLARS. Gee, with that kind of appeasement (yeah, it wouldn't happen here), all the supers in the world are going to apply for US citizenship and then start demanding $10 million, "or else," in a pathetic subtle way. If we take 1 super per million, that gives us nearly 6,000 supers, making 60 BILLION DOLLAR payments. If you increase it like you did (by about 3.5 times), that changes it to 210 BILLION.[/quote']

 

By the standards of the US goverment budget (2 and a bit trillion dollars), a few dozen billion dollars is not a lot of money. This isn't going to break the bank at all and having an absolute monopoly on superhumans would be . . . useful.

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

If the results are going to displayed on your screen and not just "You Win" "You Lose". You don't need much range to see what is going to be displayed in the next few seconds, IMO. Otherwise you couldn't use Precog to win the lottery because you'd have to be at the site of the drawing or have enough range to reach it.

 

At least thats how it works on the few casino sites I've seen and how I'd run it. If it works differently overall I'd appreciate the information.

I'll take Texas No Limit Hold 'Em as an example of an online pokwer game. You get your two cards dealt to you and you bet. The tables hold up to ten players at one time and you each have about 20-30 seconds to bet. That could be up to 5 minutes of needed precog for the flop of the next three cards. Then there will be some folding and betting before the fourth card and ditto for the fifth card. Your precog will cost endurance, so you won't be able to play a full game with it. So it may become a hinderance to try and play an online game.

 

Also, by looking back at FREd, precog only gives you one sense (sight, sound, or smell, for example) and it (the vision) is not necessarily fully explained.

 

You bring up an interesting point in that you only need to observe the results, as opposed to what is happening (in other words, you don't need to see a celebrity die in a snow skiing accident in another state, when you have a precog of it on the tv news or in a newspaper), but I somehow don't think these would be *controlled* and thus might make the precog unable to use their advantages for money.

 

Though, looking in FREd on page 93, it's even possible that the visions are unclear, and thus, in a poker game, the precog might not make heads or tails until it's too late.

[Kirby]

Re: Jane's Superhumans

 

For example' date=' Toronto had a SARS outbreak not too long ago.[/quote']

Very nice analogy.

 

Apply that to super-humans who might spontaneously explode or somesuch on an airplane... I think if you can't detect super-powers' date=' we'd have lists of known super-humans for screeners. There'd be additional hassles to travel, but no outright bar on travel.[/quote']

Well, I think you've stuped yourself here. If you can't detect them, you can't list them.

 

Though, if say, John Doe was a known super who tended to "explode" in flames anywhere from once an hour to once a day, I could see John Doe being placed on a 'no-fly' list, but I don't see him being banned from driving his own car. Heck, if you don't have to retake driving lessons over a possible 80 year 'driving career,' I don't see supers being banned from it.