[Anonymouse]

Originally Posted by Jaymoss

They only I believe have to power to access bank accounts if they suspect fraud. They are simply checking your savings to see if any deductions are needed

Ah. I wasn't aware of that; I thought they had total access. Fair enough.

Given the minimal state of my bank balance - the most I've ever had was around £8,000, which was why Barclays advised me to open an ISA - I very much doubt they suspect me. I've never had as much as 5 figures in my entire life, and I suspect I never will. The threshold figure for UC is £16,000, and I always laugh at the notion that I'll ever have even that much. These days, £16K is not a fortune.

"Try the Lottery!" I've heard. Yeah. When it becomes more likely than a meteorite strike, I might consider it. Maybe. Until then, I do not have the money to waste.

Nor will you ever find me in a casino; I know enough about statistics to know better.

There is no such thing as a lucky streak - only a statistical aberration. No roll of the dice or spin of the wheel has any correlation whatsoever with any other one (probably casino bosses now realise they don't need to cheat - all they need is a steady stream of suckers...which they get). It happens. You will get the odd run where things go in your favour. More usually they'll go against you.

I never forget the wisdom of Earl Dumarest, in #20, Web Of Sand:

"Haven’t you learned yet the one inescapable truth about gambling? That those who need to win never do?”

Write what you know. I have little doubt E.C. Tubb got burned at some point, doubtless in that time of life when youth and stupidity are synonymous. Been there, done that, though even when I was younger (even when I had that £8,000), I had more sense - mainly through Dumarest.

Though I do wonder about their objection to systems - these are based on precisely the same concepts as the games, so how is it cheating? Most people don't have the patience anyway - you have to stick with it, even when things are going sour. That's where they go wrong - that, and seldom having the sense to quit while they're ahead.

I'm not even pretending to be wise; I've done stupid things. We all have. But I've never been that stupid.

None of this answers the question of speed - it should take a few seconds to type, then, at most, a few seconds to retrieve the data, say if there's a hitch in signal traffic (like when downloads usually happen in 3 seconds or so, but occasionally take 10 or so). 48 hours is ridiculous in this day and age. I say again, it shouldn't take longer than 48 seconds, because this is what computers are FOR.

And if the world governments ever get their act together and mine Psyche, none of this will matter - we'll all be rich! If everyone is rich, then no-one is!