To be fair, I talk so much I barely remember half of it (if I was consistent about the things I say in the first place). As a whole I figure life is pretty deterministic, even if there's a degree of randomness to it. Nuclear decay and such. Still, the assumption of free will seems necessary in a practical sense, but not in terms of it being literally true. It's kind of a work hypothesis, or like an incorrect assumption you hold on to, because it delivers results. Like luck potentially.

Take religious doctrine, taboos, and that sort of stuff. We don't always know why things happen, but we're pretty good at spotting patterns and adjusting our behavior accordingly. It's an outcome based approach. Not sure, but I think it's related to the concept of empiricism, or rather the idea of "learning" from experience. You won't be always right, there's that whole fallacy about attributing a false correlation between events because they're seemingly sequential, but you won't be always wrong either. Like saying ladders are bad luck. Not because Zeus was actually chucking lightning bolts at you, but because it's shorthand for staying away from falling objects, or whatever keeps injuring the happy go lucky.

In terms of having bad karma I reckon some really do have a dark cloud following them. Traditionally speaking I believe karma isn't as much of a cosmic justice system, but more a "what comes around goes around" kind of acknowledgement of consequences. Eat a lot, gain weight. Treat people like shit, off with your head. That's an oversimplification, but you get it. Might be more subtle in many cases, but we all know someone who keeps magnetically attracting bad luck. Might be really just that, purely statistically speaking, but then I'd argue at some point becomes something else. Like consistently picking abusive partners.

Don't nail me on this, I'm just rambling :-).