It's not motivation I am questioning, and I am impressed with his work however.
These hand history sites are viewed badly by almost all players from recreational who know about them up to full time pros. The sites all explicitly dissallow them. Note that collecting hands on your opponents by playing against them is fine. However these sites data mining my hands when not playing v me, displaying my results and stats for all to see and offering my opponents the chance to buy hands on me to get an edge is extremely immoral IMO. Everybody wants to see them shut down that I speak to, although anonymous tables is not the way to do it.
My point is as impressed as I was by his hack if this guy is heavily involved in these sites he is ethically and morally far worse than bodog and frankly he can bugger off as far as I'm concerned (if that is the case ofc I am wanting clarification here)
Not according to Bodog. Anonymous tables even prevent this, and in addition they deleted notes without warning to ensure players didn't have a notice period in which to download and save the notes they had made already.
From reading this, in upgrading to anonymous tables, Bodog REMOVED some key anti-cheating measures that were present in the old software. Once again, colluding players can sit together. Problem gamblers can no longer self exclude. For some reason, the CLIENT is given account numbers. WHY? This hack was only possible because the client was furnished with data it simply didn't need, and in terms of security, is WORSE than furnishing the client with screen names.
As for data mining, it is still possible. Bodog have NOT prevented data mining itself, they have tried to make the mined data useless.
One wonders what other former security measures have been removed from the new software, as well as what new exploits have been made possible.
Obviously, a company that trades hand histories is faced with being put out of business if anonymous tables became the norm, and was implemented robustly; so clearly such companies have a vested interest in this "experiment" failing, and anonymous tables becoming a thing of the past.
The poker industry created the problem in the first place by requiring players to use a permanent and trackable screen name across whole networks for "security reasons". Had players been allowed to change screen name at will, it would have been easy for any player to thwart the best efforts of data mining companies to profile them.
The original "security" argument was that in requiring permanent screen names across entire networks was necessary in order to thwart collusion and other forms of cheating. Bodog are now saying this has NEVER been the case, as they are supposedly perfectly capable of preventing collusion internally, even though the tables are anonymous. Maybe there was another reason for poker rooms wanting individual players to be easy to track, profile, etc. It is only loss of business from the "fish" who are fed up of being beaten down by the pros that has forced them to rethink this "security requirement", with one room allowing weekly screen name changes, and others trying anonymous tables.
Data mining companies are not going to go away, they will adapt to the new environment and develop new tools that still offer an edge at anonymous tables, even though individual players can no longer be profiled.
If HHSmithy had completely lacked morals, they would have developed and sold a tool to exploit this flaw, and enable predators to raid Bodog's anonymous tables. Instead, they judged this to be "crossing the line", and exposed the flaw.
Perhaps this exposes part of the bigger picture, poker rooms are incapable of ENFORCING any rules covering prohibited aids to play.