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

9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight

azmirror.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 184 posts

Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight

#61

Post by grim_io »

highfrequency wrote: post #53
runako wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kalshi is just hoping to be treated like Uber was. This is not a bad strategy for a company in our asymmetric regulatory environment. Fortunes were made in crypto on exactly this one-way bet. Go on breaking the law until you get a favorable judge/Congress. Nobody is going to jail (we don't really do that anymore), you might pay a fine. Every once in a while you'll have change the app a little to sort of comply with…

> Go on breaking the law until you get a favorable judge/Congress. Nobody is going to jail (we don't really do that anymore), you might pay a fine. Binance, FTX, BitMex, Silk Road founders all went to jail - it’s a huge coin flip.

It was a different time.

Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight

#62

Post by Domenic_S »

steveBK123 wrote: post #44
8note wrote: post #23

as an argument for sports betting as a market, i remember when the wrong team won the world series, and hadnt setup their correct merch and so on for online sales, and it was a disaster trying to get all the right stuff together to minimize fraud and abuse. if an online sales provider could hedge against the risk of that win, the gamble would help pay for all the chaos as a result

Lots of bespoke insurance already exists. Lloyds will insure your rocket cargo or even provide terrorist strikes. Doesn’t mean we need people wagering at kalshi on “number of terrorism fatalities in London before end of 2025”.

> or even provide terrorist strikes.

I'm sorry, Lloyd's will _what_??

Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight

#63

Post by kingkawn »

highfrequency wrote: post #53
runako wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kalshi is just hoping to be treated like Uber was. This is not a bad strategy for a company in our asymmetric regulatory environment. Fortunes were made in crypto on exactly this one-way bet. Go on breaking the law until you get a favorable judge/Congress. Nobody is going to jail (we don't really do that anymore), you might pay a fine. Every once in a while you'll have change the app a little to sort of comply with…

> Go on breaking the law until you get a favorable judge/Congress. Nobody is going to jail (we don't really do that anymore), you might pay a fine. Binance, FTX, BitMex, Silk Road founders all went to jail - it’s a huge coin flip.

offering services illegally is one thing, defrauding investors in Ponzi schemes is different

Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight

#64

Post by fooey »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #34
DannyBee wrote: post #19

Lawyer here - As i explained last time we had a variant of this thread (see comment history if you are interested), this is a very complicated area that people try to make very simple. It doesn't have to be complicated, mind you, but right now the way the law is written is basically: 1. Transmitting sports betting info between states is a federal crime unless it's legal in both states (18 U.S.C. § 1084(a)) 2. The CEA…

> because Kalshi doesn't want to follow the actual law Correction: because the federal government doesn't want Kalshi to follow the actual law. CFTC ordered Kalshi to continue operating in NY when NY tried to crack down on it. Donald Trump Jr. is a paid advisor for Kalshi. The US Government's conservative leaders are ignoring states' rights in order to personally profit, using Kalshi as a tool. > this will end up at…

absolutely nothing in going to happen in the US congress until 2029

we're essentially one year of three into one of the least effective lame duck legislative bodies we'll ever see

Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight

#65

Post by fooey »

dmix wrote: post #50
jfengel wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have them because the Founders thought it was a good idea. Then they thought it was a good idea to have two houses with different criteria, giving two chances to quash legislation. Plus the veto. Plus the Supreme Court (whose job they left almost completely undefined, so they made up a job description). So we have them because we can't get rid of them. But they are practically useless. They can usually manage the…

That’s the history of separation of powers, the judiciary is the final check in the loop. It doesn’t fully explain why Congress has allowed the expansion of executive power for nearly a century, resulting in more and more major issues being pushed to the Supreme Court. That’s not to say states have lost power, their reach has also grown exponentially far outpacing even the federal in terms of number of workers and wr…

the lesson congress learned from the Hillary Clinton coronation getting derailed by Obama was to absolutely never ever vote on anything important

Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight

#66

Post by aetch »

highfrequency wrote: post #53
runako wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kalshi is just hoping to be treated like Uber was. This is not a bad strategy for a company in our asymmetric regulatory environment. Fortunes were made in crypto on exactly this one-way bet. Go on breaking the law until you get a favorable judge/Congress. Nobody is going to jail (we don't really do that anymore), you might pay a fine. Every once in a while you'll have change the app a little to sort of comply with…

> Go on breaking the law until you get a favorable judge/Congress. Nobody is going to jail (we don't really do that anymore), you might pay a fine. Binance, FTX, BitMex, Silk Road founders all went to jail - it’s a huge coin flip.

Now they’re getting out of jail with a few donations

Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight

#67

Post by brendoelfrendo »

vkou wrote: post #52
runako wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kalshi is just hoping to be treated like Uber was. This is not a bad strategy for a company in our asymmetric regulatory environment. Fortunes were made in crypto on exactly this one-way bet. Go on breaking the law until you get a favorable judge/Congress. Nobody is going to jail (we don't really do that anymore), you might pay a fine. Every once in a while you'll have change the app a little to sort of comply with…

What kind of society do you get when the positive EV play is to always break the law first, litigate later?

If you're in the USA, you can see for yourself by looking out the window. It's not great!

Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight

#68

Post by pibaker »

echelon wrote: post #10
mullingitover wrote: post #5

> “Congress did not take a wrecking ball to all sports gambling regulations built up over decades by federal, state, and tribal governments when it amended the (Commodity Exchange Act),” Judge Ryan Nelson wrote in the unanimous decision. Incredible that it's taken this long to arrive at the obvious.

Gambling is a negative externality that needs to be taxed. Gambling takes advantage of the poor, under-educated, and addictive personalities and puts them into financial distress. This places burden on families, the state, and local municipalities. It creates strain on the workforce and deflects legitimate economic activity that would otherwise strengthen the economy. We're a free society. I'm fine with gambling from…

I don't think you can equate Kalshi style "prediction market" with gambling in Vegas. The worst thing that can happen in Vegas is you the gambler go bankrupt. In the meantime we already have reports of war intelligence in Ukraine being distorted so someone who betted on frontline movements can pocket some cash. Losing a war because some rich degenerate is trying to bet his way towards a second Ferrari is less unlikely than you imagined.

Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight

#69

Post by lern_too_spel »

echelon wrote: post #10
mullingitover wrote: post #5

> “Congress did not take a wrecking ball to all sports gambling regulations built up over decades by federal, state, and tribal governments when it amended the (Commodity Exchange Act),” Judge Ryan Nelson wrote in the unanimous decision. Incredible that it's taken this long to arrive at the obvious.

Gambling is a negative externality that needs to be taxed. Gambling takes advantage of the poor, under-educated, and addictive personalities and puts them into financial distress. This places burden on families, the state, and local municipalities. It creates strain on the workforce and deflects legitimate economic activity that would otherwise strengthen the economy. We're a free society. I'm fine with gambling from…

Why should it be comparable to tobacco? It should be derived from first principles. Figure out the external cost to society and tax it enough to pay for those costs after money distribution overheads. If there is no tax structure where the revenues exceed the costs, ban it.

The difficulty with taxing prediction markets is that encouraging gambling on some events incentivizes gamblers to try to influence those events in a way contrary to how people would want to influence them in the absence of gambling, which typically means gamblers are incentivized to influence events in a way that will increase societal harms. For some events, resolving one way or the other is inconsequential, but this is not true for many of the events I see people gambling on in prediction markets.

Re: 9th Circuit sides with states in Kalshi gambling fight

#70

Post by crossroadsguy »

(Not American)

What does 9th circuit or some circuit court mean?

It some name of a specific court, just not the place name?

Or is it special kind of court and “9” is some sort of level? Importance or hierarchy related? Escalation level? (Assuming your SC eventually is also at the top like in India)

Post reply on HN