Not sure if that's true by number of gamblers, but my gut says it's mostly true weighed by the amount of money gambled away. I say mostly, because we don't count rich kids / oligarchs wasting money for fun, who might dominate the value chart.

Suppose another ape and I are out enjoying the State of Nature, and we both should have a round troy ounce of silver in our pockets, with heads and tails as an agreed convention. Suppose I were to say to the other ape, "on whose face does Fortune shine her rays?" and we were to flip both rounds, such that whomever showed heads had the better of it: were it both of us, we would exchange, but one head and one tails, well, one ape will leave the gamble richer and the other skint.

Tell me toolz, how should you prevent this encounter without committing a human rights violation? Show your work, please.

All I've said is that you, nor I, should be responsible for making this behavior possible - you seem to have misinterpreted my intent completely if you think the absence of a right is the same as a mandate against someones ability to participate freely as they wish with other consenting adults.

Like without getting into nits, you can actually directly effect the direction and value of a company, but you can't affect the roll of dice or the output of a random number generators.

Risk in and of itself doesn't imply the entire thing is gambling; that said, investing by itself would be way closer to gambling in that context, imo

I'm saying the opposite of what you seem to be implying. I'm saying anyone can gamble or start a business, but it's no ones responsibility to make sure they have the option to do so.