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

Kalshi attacks a Wisconsin law banning election bets as 'voter suppression'

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 80 posts

Re: Kalshi attacks a Wisconsin law banning election bets as 'voter suppression'

#31

Post by dctoedt »

recursivedoubts wrote: post #5

The complete transformation and legitimization of betting culture in the United States has been surreal to watch. From you had to know a guy to baseball TV announcers giving odds on a home run this inning in less than a decade. I know this is hard to conceive of, but there was a time when there were no gambling ads on TV! The crazy part? The other half of the ads you see on TV (pharmaceuticals) weren't there either!

> The complete transformation and legitimization of betting culture in the United States has been surreal to watch.

Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress implicitly predicted this (albeit for Luna, which was obviously modeled on the U.S.).

(Heinlein was right about so many things ....)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moon_Is_a_Harsh_Mistress

Re: Kalshi attacks a Wisconsin law banning election bets as 'voter suppression'

#32

Post by SubmarineClub »

ecshafer wrote: post #15
recursivedoubts wrote: post #5

The complete transformation and legitimization of betting culture in the United States has been surreal to watch. From you had to know a guy to baseball TV announcers giving odds on a home run this inning in less than a decade. I know this is hard to conceive of, but there was a time when there were no gambling ads on TV! The crazy part? The other half of the ads you see on TV (pharmaceuticals) weren't there either!

I am hard-line on this. Sports betting and prediction markets should be banned. Casinos should be banned. Scratch offs should be banned. Its feeding into the worst tendencies of people and hurts the most disadvantaged families. People playing a poker game with their friends, or buying a super bowl square at their bar isn't great but at least it was off to the side and hidden. We have a large chesterson's fence level…

What blows my mind is how many “progressives” I know who really support this libertarian-style maximum “freedom.”

I’ve been the stodgy conservative of my friend group saying “uh, maybe there was a good reason for banning this stuff?”

Pretty funny, since I actually was a committed libertarian for a while.

Re: Kalshi attacks a Wisconsin law banning election bets as 'voter suppression'

#33

Post by cogman10 »

buttercraft wrote: post #29
giancarlostoro wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ecigs worry me the most since you really cannot tell what someone truly has in there, it could be nicotine, it could be “legal” THC or other random nonsense, I wouldnt know, it all looks the same. I have a friend who gave up cigarettes for ecigs but he is actually doing it for the nicotine, saves him a fortune, he was smoking a pack a week in NYC. My thing is, how healthy are ecigs compared to real cigarettes really?

Option A: nicotine. Option B: nicotine plus a lot of really bad stuff. You're seriously questioning which is better?

Dose makes the poison and ecigs enable giving it's users 10x the nicotine you'd get from a single cigarette.

I think you are right that cigs are less healthy, but I have to wonder if megadosing nicotine isn't also a pretty big problem.

Re: Kalshi attacks a Wisconsin law banning election bets as 'voter suppression'

#34

Post by ecshafer »

SubmarineClub wrote: post #32
ecshafer wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am hard-line on this. Sports betting and prediction markets should be banned. Casinos should be banned. Scratch offs should be banned. Its feeding into the worst tendencies of people and hurts the most disadvantaged families. People playing a poker game with their friends, or buying a super bowl square at their bar isn't great but at least it was off to the side and hidden. We have a large chesterson's fence level…

What blows my mind is how many “progressives” I know who really support this libertarian-style maximum “freedom.” I’ve been the stodgy conservative of my friend group saying “uh, maybe there was a good reason for banning this stuff?” Pretty funny, since I actually was a committed libertarian for a while.

A big difference I think is that Progressivism was based on Christianity and Utopian Socialist ideals in the 1800s and 1900s (at least in the United States). So it was much easier for them to support child labor laws, pensions, banning drinking and gambling, etc. by looking at it from the perspective of protecting the poor and destitute, making the nation strong, etc.. Even the Imperial Germans did progressive programs from a paternalistic conservative approach. People were pointing to the Gospel or Rerum Novarum. Not progressivism is more rooted in anarchism or marxism. Which is why they have a lot more saying to remove property rights. Or they will push for legalizing drugs and abolishing prisons, despite that obviously making society worse, but the state, property, etc are all evil.

Re: Kalshi attacks a Wisconsin law banning election bets as 'voter suppression'

#35

Post by buttercraft »

cogman10 wrote: post #33
buttercraft wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Option A: nicotine. Option B: nicotine plus a lot of really bad stuff. You're seriously questioning which is better?

Dose makes the poison and ecigs enable giving it's users 10x the nicotine you'd get from a single cigarette. I think you are right that cigs are less healthy, but I have to wonder if megadosing nicotine isn't also a pretty big problem.

That's true, ecigs introduce different types of risks:

Wikipedia: "The recent rise in the use of electronic cigarettes, many forms of which are designed to be refilled with nicotine-containing "e-liquid" supplied in small plastic bottles, has renewed interest in nicotine overdoses, especially the possibility of young children ingesting the liquids."

And not just ingesting, but absorbing it through the skin.

Also: "Serious nicotine poisoning seems normally prevented by the fact that relatively low doses of nicotine cause nausea and vomiting, which stops users from further intake."

Re: Kalshi attacks a Wisconsin law banning election bets as 'voter suppression'

#36

Post by cogman10 »

buttercraft wrote: post #35
cogman10 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dose makes the poison and ecigs enable giving it's users 10x the nicotine you'd get from a single cigarette. I think you are right that cigs are less healthy, but I have to wonder if megadosing nicotine isn't also a pretty big problem.

That's true, ecigs introduce different types of risks: Wikipedia: "The recent rise in the use of electronic cigarettes, many forms of which are designed to be refilled with nicotine-containing "e-liquid" supplied in small plastic bottles, has renewed interest in nicotine overdoses, especially the possibility of young children ingesting the liquids." And not just ingesting, but absorbing it through the skin. Also: "Se…

> Serious nicotine poisoning seems normally prevented by the fact that relatively low doses of nicotine cause nausea and vomiting, which stops users from further intake.

This is true, but this is also about short term poisoning. I'm more thinking about the long term problems. Alcohol will also stop many cases of acute poisoning through similar nausea and vomiting. However, prolonged use is still bad for your health.

Re: Kalshi attacks a Wisconsin law banning election bets as 'voter suppression'

#37

Post by amavect »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #11
tdeck wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some time around 2015 I remember seeing Powell station in SF completely plastered with DraftKings ads and thinking "wait, I thought that was illegal". It seems to have only snowballed since then. In 2020 I was in downtown Philadelphia before the election and saw a massive screen with a Polymarket ad, and at that time Polymarket wasn't even legal in the US. From nicotine to gambling harmful habits that our society had…

Ecigs worry me the most since you really cannot tell what someone truly has in there, it could be nicotine, it could be “legal” THC or other random nonsense, I wouldnt know, it all looks the same. I have a friend who gave up cigarettes for ecigs but he is actually doing it for the nicotine, saves him a fortune, he was smoking a pack a week in NYC. My thing is, how healthy are ecigs compared to real cigarettes really?

I see replies that keep repeating the same "it's got no smoke and tar so it must cause far less harm", as if common sense always matches reality. Coating the lungs with cooked propylene glycol and glycerine could cause similar harm to smoke and tar, or even entirely new harms, but I don't really know that. Use empiricism and share reviews, please.

Direct health implications of e-cigarette use: a systematic scoping review with evidence assessment https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11317248/

"Conclusion: Smokers or former smokers who switch to e-cigarettes may reduce their exposure to carcinogens and lower their risk of developing severe health issues associated with conventional smoking. However, in healthy individuals who have never smoked traditional cigarettes, the use of e-cigarettes introduces several cardiovascular and respiratory adverse effects. These findings suggest that while e-cigarettes can be a strategic harm reduction tool for smokers, they are not a safe option for non-smokers."

E-Cigarette Use, Small Airway Fibrosis, and Constrictive Bronchiolitis https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10137322/

"CONCLUSIONS: After thorough evaluation for other potential etiologies, vaping was considered to be the most likely common causal etiology for all patients due to the temporal association of symptomatic chronic lung disease with e-cigarette use and partial improvement in symptoms after e-cigarette cessation. In this series, we associate the histopathologic pattern of small airway–centered fibrosis, including constrictive bronchiolitis, with vaping, potentially defining a clinical and pathologic entity associated with e-cigarette use. (Funded in part by the National Institutes of Health.)"

E-cigarettes and Vaping: A Smoking Cessation Method or Another Smoking Innovation? https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9833272/

"Abstract: [cut] With well-known health risks from traditional smoking, e-cigarettes are viewed as a safe way of smoking, appealing more to youth. Additionally, extensive e-cigarette marketing boosted by the internet and fame has resulted in worries that e-cigarettes can lead to a renormalization of cigarette smoking and can be used as a new method to consume vaporized drugs. Although the concern that e-cigarettes are as harmful as traditional smoking has been raised, youth and most healthcare providers remain relatively unaware. [cut]"

Re: Kalshi attacks a Wisconsin law banning election bets as 'voter suppression'

#38

Post by cwmma »

SubmarineClub wrote: post #32
ecshafer wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am hard-line on this. Sports betting and prediction markets should be banned. Casinos should be banned. Scratch offs should be banned. Its feeding into the worst tendencies of people and hurts the most disadvantaged families. People playing a poker game with their friends, or buying a super bowl square at their bar isn't great but at least it was off to the side and hidden. We have a large chesterson's fence level…

What blows my mind is how many “progressives” I know who really support this libertarian-style maximum “freedom.” I’ve been the stodgy conservative of my friend group saying “uh, maybe there was a good reason for banning this stuff?” Pretty funny, since I actually was a committed libertarian for a while.

A lot of libertarian dogma is based on classic homo economicus 'lets pretend people act perfectly rationally' type theories that just really break down when confronted with how humans actually act.

Re: Kalshi attacks a Wisconsin law banning election bets as 'voter suppression'

#39

Post by imglorp »

ratelimitsteve wrote: post #26
imglorp wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a while, we had tons of alcohol and cigarette ads. At some point they were both deemed catastrophically harmful to society. Maybe prediction markets end up there?

unfortunately the dominant ideology right now states that the ability to do catastrophic harm to both yourself and society in general is fundamental to the nature of freedom, and is therefore paramount.

That's the argument we heard back then too. Smoker's rights to spray cancer to everyone around them. Drinker's rights to smash innocents on the roadways. In reality, the tobacco and alcohol industries lobbied hard to protect themselves. Alcohol is still lobbying hard to prevent recreational weed.

Re: Kalshi attacks a Wisconsin law banning election bets as 'voter suppression'

#40

Post by buttercraft »

amavect wrote: post #37
giancarlostoro wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ecigs worry me the most since you really cannot tell what someone truly has in there, it could be nicotine, it could be “legal” THC or other random nonsense, I wouldnt know, it all looks the same. I have a friend who gave up cigarettes for ecigs but he is actually doing it for the nicotine, saves him a fortune, he was smoking a pack a week in NYC. My thing is, how healthy are ecigs compared to real cigarettes really?

I see replies that keep repeating the same "it's got no smoke and tar so it must cause far less harm", as if common sense always matches reality. Coating the lungs with cooked propylene glycol and glycerine could cause similar harm to smoke and tar, or even entirely new harms, but I don't really know that. Use empiricism and share reviews, please. Direct health implications of e-cigarette use: a systematic scoping re…

>> My thing is, how healthy are ecigs compared to real cigarettes really?

> Use empiricism

> Smokers or former smokers who switch to e-cigarettes may reduce their exposure to carcinogens and lower their risk of developing severe health issues associated with conventional smoking.

Post reply on HN