1. 30
  1. 6

    tl;dr IR camera and pre-marked deck.

    So if you are going to a home game, bring yourself some infrared light and camera and use it to inspect the deck.

    1. 4

      The blog post did mention that people used this device (or something like it?) in Vegas, but I’m struggling to figure out how they’d pull that off.

      1. 1

        It mentioned that sometimes a dealer was in on it and sometimes the house was in in it, but it doesn’t have to be both at the same time.

        Aside from that, I don’t see how you’d pull it off.

        1. 2

          a dealer being in on it doesn’t work because dealers do not have access to cards until they are put on the table by a manager.

      2. 0

        The deck isn’t marked with IR ink though.

        1. 2

          Hm? As I read the article, yes, it is. On the edges. Was this not your understanding?

          1. 1

            Clearly not, despite the clear words: “IR-absorbing ink”

            Jeez, 14 hours ago, I was apparently not of clear mind.

      3. 1

        What I didn’t see in this article is any mention of how the hell you’re supposed to get away with constantly checking your phone (or even having it on the table) during a serious poker game.

        It’s a fascinating bit of kit, but I can’t see how it could be used discreetly. Is there an in-ear or taped-to-the-thigh accessory I’m missing?

        1. 3

          Yes, it has several accessories which are detailed in the talk, including a tiny earpiece which can speak which hand is highest and haptic buzzers which signal the same.

          1. 1

            Aha, that makes much more sense — not a fan of this whole “split a thing up between multiple blogs posts and a video” approach.

        2. 0

          Trust a westerner to buy one just to write a blog post about how it works.

          1. 8

            What is that supposed to mean?

            1. -3

              Well I imagine the manufacturer won’t be very happy someone published a blog post about how it works.

              It’s an example of how our freedom of speech annoys the Chinese.

              1. 1

                I doubt that the factory making these has the kind of pull with any censorship ministry that you’re implying. This could easily be (and probably is) a post on Tianya.

                1. 1

                  I think if I Chinese person made this post they would get death-threats from the manufacturer. What’s Tianya?

                  1. 2


                    The China we’ve experienced are very different. In mine, no one cares about the very common teardowns and reverse-engineering posts about a host of products.

                    1. 2

                      Forgive me, I don’t know your background or familiarity with China. Having lived there for years I can only say that our understandings are clearly very different — in the China I know no one would be getting death threats for posting a tech breakdown on a BBS (Tianya is a very popular all-subjects BBS).

                      1. 1

                        Are you suggesting that the manufacturer is morally right to create this device intended for fraud, and to make death threats to people who talk about it (if they do in fact do that), and that people who talk about it are morally wrong?

                        Or … if it’s not meant as a moral statement, I don’t understand why else you’re using terms like “freedom” and “annoy”. Those words don’t really make sense in a sentence together, either, they seem to talk about fundamentally different things.

                        I’m not really sure how to interpret these comments, and honestly kind of confused. It seems clear we’re coming from very different world views, which I have no problem accepting, but I don’t even understand the difference. I’d like to understand, if you feel like elaborating.