Wizard's Blog

I.m not much into sports betting but it does make for some interesting reading.



There should not be anything wrong with being consistent.

It is my #1 rule of gambling...being consistent.



But if you are that consistent with your handicapping ability would one fair better (make more money) by going opposite your picks?

Indeed, if you went the opposite way of my picks that last two seasons, you would have made out very well. However, I think it was just bad luck on my part.

Are you flat betting/laying 10, 11 or 12 units? Or do you feel stronger about certain lines?

I'm flat betting. If I'm laying odds, it is to win 1 unit. If I'm getting odds, it is betting 1 unit.

A few years ago I had to take photos of about 100 different products for work (don't ask). Easiest thing to do was go to the nearby Walmart and snap away. I also had a security guard tell me I couldn't take pictures. I put the camera away, but I took the pics with my cell phone.



the local Costco warehouse has a very prominent sign on the entrance warning against taking pictures or even taking notes inside. I've never tried photography there, but I've written down prices and specs from time to time. So far no guard has tried to confiscate my notepad.

Photographer's Rights Page



Photography is not a crime



This is my hobby, and there is a lot going on. There is a war against photography happening right now in America, fueled by fear; fear of anything that is not "keep your head down and your feet moving". People have been conditioned to confuse photographers with terrorists... high quality images on the internet and Google Earth notwithstanding.



You can take pictures of whatever you want to, within reason. You might be prohibited from setting up a tripod (blocking public access), but generally speaking you are allowed to photograph anything you can normally see. You can't take a 400mm lens and shoot into windows, but you can take pictures of buildings.



Here is the extant law on photography, excerpted from USA Today:

Quote:

The law in the United States of America is pretty simple. You are allowed to photograph anything with the following exceptions:



• Certain military installations or operations.



• People who have a reasonable expectation of privacy. That is, people who are some place that's not easily visible to the general public, e.g., if you shoot through someone's window with a telephoto lens.



That's it.



You can shoot pictures of children; your rights don't change because of their age or where they are, as long as they're visible from a place that's open to the public. (So no sneaking into schools or climbing fences.)



Video taping has some more gray areas because of copyright issues, but in general the same rules apply. If anyone can see it, you can shoot it.



And yes, you can shoot on private property if it's open to the public. That includes malls, retails stores, Starbucks, banks, and office-building lobbies. If you're asked to stop and refuse, you run the risk of being charged with trespassing, but your pictures are yours. No one can legally take your camera or your memory card without a court order.



You can also shoot in subways and at airports. Check your local laws about the subway, but in New York, Washington, and San Francisco it's perfectly legal. Airport security is regulated by the Transportation Security Administration, and it's quite clear: Photography is A-OK at any commercial airport in the U.S. as long as you're in an area open to the public.



Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Heck, the solution is obvious: win enough money that you can open your own casino where you can offer single zero roulette, 3:2 pitch BJ, a 100x craps table with 12-triples the Field ... and free disposable cameras for those who want to take photographs of an exterior sign that is seen by thousands and is there in the hopes that it will be seen by thousands!



Can you imagine if the VP of public relations just happened to have been passing by at the time... those dumb security guards would get some common sense put into their brains on the spot!

Quote: mosca

People have been conditioned to confuse photographers with terrorists...

high quality images on the internet and Google Earth notwithstanding.

DJ, also from the USA Today article, (bold added, commentary to follow),

Quote:

There are a few more restrictions on publishing photos or video, though, as mentioned back in December.



You can't show private facts — things a reasonable person wouldn't want made public — unless those facts were revealed publicly. So no long-lens shots of your neighbors' odd habits.



You also can't show someone in a negative false light by, for example, using Photoshop tricks or a nasty, untrue caption.



And you can't put someone else's likeness to commercial use without their permission. This is usually mentioned in terms of celebrities, but it applies to making money from anyone's likeness.



For example, if you shoot individual kids playing in a school football game, you can't try to sell those shots to the parents; the kids have a right to the use of their likeness. You can sell photos of the game in general, though, and any shots where what's happening ("A player celebrates a goal") is more important than who's doing it ("Star running back John Doe takes a momentary rest").



Sound like a gray area? It is if you're planning to sell the pictures, but not if you're simply displaying them. And if you're using them for news purposes, all bets are off — you can pretty much publish whatever you want if it happens in public view.



The other gray area is copyrighted material. Even if it's in public, you can't sell pictures of copyrighted work — a piece of art, for example. But if the art is part of a scene you can probably get away with it.



All this in mind, it's almost always a good idea to get permission where you can and to be polite and friendly with anyone you deal with. Like good urban legends, people are absolutely sure they know the law about photography, and they're absolutely wrong.

I think what they are worried about is out of place behavior, and in a way they are doing what a good security person should do. Ever watch "The West Wing" where CJ is receiving death threats? One Secret Service guy was with her and another charachter (her niece?) at a dress shop, buying a prom dress or something. The younbger girl asks, "what are you doing and looking for?" to the agent. He shows her how he is sanning the entire area and just checking everything. She again asks and his answer is, "I will know it when I see it." He was looking at someone dressed too warm in the summer, meaning possibly carrying a weapon. Or someone taking a little too long loitering. Or a guy looking at stuff mostly only women would care about.



The guard at Boulder Station handled it right IMHO. You were alone and taking pictures but not of what most people take pictures of, thus he investigated. You were polite back to him and he saw no reason to hassle you. But he was letting you know you were being noticed. Probably happens a few times a week.



The Guard at Arizona Charlies INHO overreacted. But again, he was doing hid job, checking things out.



BTW: If the NTSB did this kind of profiling instead of wanding 5 year old kids traveling with clearly traveling on a family vacation I'd feel more safe. It is simply good police work. A hassle, yes.

Thanks for all the comments. The piece that is still missing for me is what is the common way to abuse exterior casino pictures? Or do guards just hassle anybody doing anything out of the norm? When the AZ Charlie's guard asked "Who are you with?!," I got the impression that it is a common and organized thing to take such pictures. But why? Somebody sent me a message suggesting concerns over terrorism. However, what terrorist is going to target Arizona Charlie's on Boulder Highway?



There is a similar story at ' rel='nofollow' target='_blank'>http://pokergrump.blogspot.com/2009/02/i-got-backroomed-by-casino-security.html] pokergrump.blogspot.com about a patron who was back-roomed for taking a picture inside the Cannery. Good reading.

My sister in law collects Halloween stuff. A couple years ago she was taking pics of kids in unusual costumes who came to her door. A mother got irate and called the cops. She stood on the sidewalk till they arrived and they told her you have a right to take pics of someone who comes on your property, even kids. These are paranoid times we live in. Casinos obviously feel pictures can be used to compromise them in some way. They aren't smart enough to think of it themselves, I'm sure some lawyer told them to do it.

Nevada casino security guards illegally detain man after taking photos

Quote: Carlos Miller

A Nevada man was illegally detained by casino security guards after taking photos of a mural inside the casino Wednesday night.



Robert Woolley said several security guards whisked him into a back room of the The Cannery in North Las Vegas because he refused to show them the images from his cell phone.



He was released 90 minutes later when police arrived and told the security guards that he had not broken any laws.



Nevertheless, the casino permanently banned him from ever entering the casino again.

...

You want me to track them with the rest of us schmoes in the Sport Betting Thread I started?

I like the "Please don't bet on these picks because of any faith in me" line. Which begs the question... What is the opposite of a tout?

"You want me to track them with the rest of us schmoes in the Sport Betting Thread I started?"



Sure!