Well, I tried to provide true and accurate information, but it's clear that none of you have a clue what you are talking about and would rather jump on the "it's all rigged" bandwagon and remain ignorant to how slot machines actually work. Arguing that computers cannot be random is just idiotic. Even if the randomness is deterministic, it is still effectively random for the act being performed, as the player, operator and machine itself cannot predict the next element in the sequence. Slot machines are "rigged" in the aspect that the payout rates can be set, which effect which range of random numbers result in a winning outcome. If any of you would bother to read any of the information (yes, his site has ads/endorsements on it, but it is by far the most trusted source on gaming probabilities in existence), you might actually learn something.
Here's the real argument against the rigged slot machines: it's trivially easy (for someone with the proper tools/experience) to get a hold of the machine code for a slot machine and disassemble it. If you could actually prove, through code, that the machine does not provide a random (unpredictable) outcome, then you can retire from the lawsuit. There are plenty of people who try to break these things looking for patterns so that they can cheat, retire on a lawsuit or get the machines banned because they don't want gaming in there area. If you think it's rigged, prove it and retire.
I worked as an arcade tech for ~a year Slots are no different than modern arcade games. They keep track of how much comes in vs how much goes out and adjust accordingly. Some of the big prize machines were set to pay out every $XXXX amount. I know that our 'stacker' was set to pay out every $2k(3-4 weeks) the prize was a PS3/xbox360. There are NO 'skill' games in an arcade.(ticket/prize wise)
Its trivially easy for you to do the experiment in the link I gave. Also, you could look up "forcing" which is a way to get bigger payouts from a UK machine. Basically you turn down all the lowered wins intentionally until the machine is over quota and dumps the most amount of money.
mairsilmairsil you really sound like an idiot. Have you got a link to your PhD. work which I would assume was published in a respectable journal if it was worth the paper it was printed on which you so claim. I think it'd make a good read. True randomness does not exist in computers, you can get 'more' randomness such as cryptographic chips or bluetooth devices which return random on the amount of data traffic in the air or radiation decay scanners which trigger based on an unstable substance decaying. In nature, true randomness does not exist either, everything happens based on energy and energy levels, i.e. if there was no energy then nothing would happen at all and if there's extreme levels of energy then everything would self destruct.
This, we agree on. "Random" as a concept DOES exist in computing, which is the point that I am trying to get across. While it is simply algorithmic in design and not truly random by the idea that "anything can happen at any time", it is imperceptibly random to an observer.