Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FBI Raids Home of Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 241 posts

Re: FBI Raids Home of Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan

#61

Post by rty32 »

neilv wrote: post #28

> "This is obvious political retribution by the outgoing administration against Polymarket for providing a market that correctly called the 2024 presidential election," a Polymarket spokesperson tells Axios. When I saw that statement, from a company spokesperson, it was striking. Is it now respectable and advisable for a corporation to make official statements like this?

Wild take that might actually be true: by attacking the Biden administration, the company wants to appeal to Trump and maybe even get Trump's attention (and favor), hoping that the Trump administration will loosen the regulations on betting and eventually make it legal to operate their business in the US.

Re: FBI Raids Home of Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan

#62

Post by scottyah »

aiforecastthway wrote: post #42
scottyah wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Robinhood launched a new feature where we could bet on the presidential candidate. I've heard of a couple others too, so I think that laws were created and funded by competitors, and they defined what was legal in a way that excluded polymarket. I think in this case, polymarket allows betting on anything, competitors got betting on the election legalized ( https://www.barrons.com/news/last-minute-legal-ruling-allows.…

Polymarket could've easily registered as an exchange at any point in the last 4+ years, and then itself filed the suit that its competitors filed. Instead they chose to just ignore the law. > VC's call it Regulatory Capture This isn't regulatory capture. You can disagree with the regulation, but the barrier to entry here is not that high. Kalshi is like 5 years old. "Capture" is a thing, and it does not just mean "an…

You're right, I had been using a definition of regulatory capture that doesn't really fit what I'm seeing when I look it up. I learned it to mean capture of market share through regulation, either by getting your competitors banned, forced creation of consumers through law (like car seats/helmets/paper straws). Maybe someone knows what that is called?

Instead, it means regulatory agencies become dominated by the interests of those they were originally charged to regulate.

I still speculate this raid to be Kalshi/Robinhood/whomever to be going after polymarket at a prime time- the concept of betting on events got huge and the industry of event-hedging directly (avoiding the stock market proxy) no longer needs to band together to get the idea out- now it's a matter of getting all the consumers to choose your particular product vs a competitors.

Re: FBI Raids Home of Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan

#63

Post by stickfigure »

galleywest200 wrote: post #60
kwisatzh wrote: post #8

He’ll get pardoned. It’s a Thiel company.

Accepting a presidential pardon requires an admission of guilt. Would being a confirmed criminal aide them in business in any way?

Incorrect. A pardon does require a conviction, however. And it will probably never get that far.

Re: FBI Raids Home of Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan

#64

Post by ttul »

rty32 wrote: post #61
neilv wrote: post #28

> "This is obvious political retribution by the outgoing administration against Polymarket for providing a market that correctly called the 2024 presidential election," a Polymarket spokesperson tells Axios. When I saw that statement, from a company spokesperson, it was striking. Is it now respectable and advisable for a corporation to make official statements like this?

Wild take that might actually be true: by attacking the Biden administration, the company wants to appeal to Trump and maybe even get Trump's attention (and favor), hoping that the Trump administration will loosen the regulations on betting and eventually make it legal to operate their business in the US.

This is not a wild take at all. Every major corporation in the US is currently sucking up to Trump because his presidency will be entirely transactional and without regard to the constitutional purpose of the office. If you scratch his back, he will find a way to scratch yours - until it’s no longer convenient for him to do so.

Re: FBI Raids Home of Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan

#65

Post by _DeadFred_ »

inglor_cz wrote: post #9
bigtechennui wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One explanation is it gives Polymarket more rope to hang themselves with. Trading volume likely spiked in the lead up, and during, election night. Big numbers make for splashier headlines. Another could be concern of doing anything visibly election related prior to the election, in case the winner didn’t like the action.

While I understand that logic, I also find it a bit distasteful. Law enforcement shouldn't tolerate crimes being committed on its watch any longer than necessary. Of course, the exact meaning of "necessary" is the problem. We can probably all agree that letting a serial murderer kill more people in order to have more evidence against him would be an absolute abomination. But the situation is not that clear with white…

The wheels of justice move slowly, and for good reason.

I'm confused what your point is? Is it when cops/prosecutors build cases that take time they are tacitly saying the crime is victimless? Do you think law enforcement should only target street level dealers/car thieves because to spend time building cases against drug distributors/chop shops renders the crime victimless?

Re: FBI Raids Home of Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan

#66

Post by mise_en_place »

beejiu wrote: post #11

Can we please stop calling them "prediction markets". This only legitimizes what they really are, "gambling exchanges".

That's overly reductive. Perhaps you missed this article that was on the front page? https://asteriskmag.com/issues/08/the-death-and-life-of-pred...

Re: FBI Raids Home of Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan

#67

Post by n2d4 »

orblivion wrote: post #43
legitster wrote: post #4

Obviously there are no details yet, but I suspect it's as simple as: - Polymarket is still very illegal in the US - Lol. We all know it's easy to get around that - If the CEO knew or was complicit in US citizens breaking laws, he could be in trouble. And if there was evidence he was encouraging it, he could be in big trouble

Kalshi got the goahead from an appeals court to list election bets. I think Robinhood added election bets soonafter. Is there a reason that wouldn't apply to Polymarket? Granted, Polymarket was operating before that ruling. https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-federal-court-upholds-rulin...

Even if election bets are legal, the betting market is still highly regulated.

Re: FBI Raids Home of Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan

#68

Post by CodeWriter23 »

stickfigure wrote: post #63
galleywest200 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Accepting a presidential pardon requires an admission of guilt. Would being a confirmed criminal aide them in business in any way?

Incorrect. A pardon does require a conviction, however. And it will probably never get that far.

Incorrect. There is no requirement that even an indictment has occurred in the past.

Re: FBI Raids Home of Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan

#69

Post by cryptica »

legitster wrote: post #4

Obviously there are no details yet, but I suspect it's as simple as: - Polymarket is still very illegal in the US - Lol. We all know it's easy to get around that - If the CEO knew or was complicit in US citizens breaking laws, he could be in trouble. And if there was evidence he was encouraging it, he could be in big trouble

[flagged]

Re: FBI Raids Home of Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan

#70

Post by moomin »

neilv wrote: post #28

> "This is obvious political retribution by the outgoing administration against Polymarket for providing a market that correctly called the 2024 presidential election," a Polymarket spokesperson tells Axios. When I saw that statement, from a company spokesperson, it was striking. Is it now respectable and advisable for a corporation to make official statements like this?

There’s people in the comments characterising this as political positioning, and I think they’re dead on. However, it continues to do my head in how utterly ridiculous this statement is. Literally, there’s not even a motive.
Post reply on HN