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

Minnesota becomes first state to ban prediction markets

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 256 posts

Re: Minnesota becomes first state to ban prediction markets

#241

Post by ziml77 »

nozzlegear wrote: post #140
sergiotapia wrote: post #46

There should be a ban on the instagram reels showing gambling like it's not a big deal. They are deliberately targeting teens and it's quite sickening. If you work at one of these companies it's the same as working for a payday loan company. You are making blood money.

I recently learned that a World of Warcraft AWC champion that I used to follow has been streaming slots on Twitch for hours a day, every day for the last year. I don't watch Twitch, so I was blown away that they allow that kind of thing on their platform. The cherry on top is that he runs some kind of fake gambling extension in his chat while he's streaming, where viewers bet on how much money he'll win or lose and t…

I have no problem with Twitch channel points gambling via predictions, but doing that alongside actual* gambling is really messed up. It's blurring the line to the viewers between the two. And probably putting ideas in their head like "oh I won so many channel points predicting the outcomes, I should do some real gambling!"

*It could be sponsored and thus either rigged or all of the money being used was provided by the company under the expectation that it would be paid back to them through losses.

Re: Minnesota becomes first state to ban prediction markets

#242

Post by advisedwang »

notact wrote: post #237
advisedwang wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is a inconsistent position that the federal government can regulate gambling but not ban it. The Controlled Substances Act also rests on the interstate commerce clause. Can you imagine if the federal government was allowed to regulate heroin sales but not ban it?

My question wasn't so much about the contradiction between regulating & banning authority, but questioning the authority to do either in the first place. I.e. I don't understand why gambling must necessarily be considered to be inter-state. But I now think this is unrelated to the point you were trying to make.

I agree that the broad reading of the interstate commerce clause seems dubious, but the same precedent [1] underlies the controlled substance act, clean water act, violence against women act, endangered species act and a whole lot of other laws. Unless you are willing to hack away a large chunk of US law, you can't really undo that one.

[1] Wickard v. Filburn ruled that growing wheat FOR USE ON YOUR OWN FARM can be regulated as interstate commerce because otherwise that demand would tend to raise prices on a interstate grain market.

Re: Minnesota becomes first state to ban prediction markets

#243

Post by anon291 »

meta_gunslinger wrote: post #213
kenferry wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Er, I agree it's incredibly old, but also has been treated as societal ill and subject to regulation for its entire history.

Should cannabis and other currently illegal substances remain as such?

You can regulate the supply of a substance. Gambling is a human behavior. It's a normal human behavior. I don't understand the pearl clutching around gambling honestly.

Re: Minnesota becomes first state to ban prediction markets

#244

Post by anon291 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #173
anon291 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prediction markets ensure that there is always produce in your store.

Commodities futures markets on which what are traded are contracts for future delivery of goods do that. Prediction markets—forums for gambling on the outcome of a platform-provided referee as to how a proposition about the future will be resolved—do not do that at all. Now, the legal definition of commodities markets for regulatory purposes in some jurisdictions may be broad enough that prediction markets are legall…

A commodity market may not be a pure prediction market but you can buy weather futures on most commodities market and a host of other predictions which are necessary for agricultural production.

https://investor.cmegroup.com/news-releases/news-release-det...

Re: Minnesota becomes first state to ban prediction markets

#245

Post by kube-system »

steve1977 wrote: post #191
kube-system wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, a stock is a share of ownership in a company. Now yes, people bet on the derivative value of those ownership shares... but that also happens to basically every asset. If a stock is a prediction market, then so is corn, and gold, and your home.

That's my point. Where to draw the line and why? Polymarket bad because it's accessible to everyone, futures trading on the CME good because it's only available to the rich?

Corn futures deliver real physical corn at the expiration date.

Polymarket is literally booking wagers that have no underlying financial assets of any sort anywhere and labeling them as “options”

Re: Minnesota becomes first state to ban prediction markets

#246

Post by prawn »

overgard wrote: post #73
superfrank wrote: post #34

For the record, Minnesota currently has a complete ban on sports betting. We've seen a couple other states that allow sports betting go after prediction markets. Personally, I feel that any state that allows sports betting is going to struggle to argue a case to ban prediction markets because you're essentially arguing over implementation details. Even arguments that certain prediction markets are ripe for insider tr…

I think sports betting is a lot less harmful than prediction markets. With sports betting if someone throws a game to get a pay day, for instance, the only real consequence is on the reputation of the sport. In prediction markets, people can do all sorts of awful things to make money as insiders..

The sports gambling ads and offers to young males in Australia are absolutely relentless. Here's a recent story:

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/may/16/how-b...

"Hudson also redeemed 489 gambling inducements, including 302 from Sportsbet and 72 from Bet365, the court heard – likely to be an underestimate of what was offered to him."

"On multiple occasions, Gray said, Hudson withdrew all the funds from his gambling accounts, and did not bet or deposit again until he received a deposit match inducement."

He opened his first gambling account literally on his 18th birthday. He had gambling accounts with five different bookies. His behaviour triggered alerts at the bookies dozens of times.

Re: Minnesota becomes first state to ban prediction markets

#247

Post by CPLX »

meta_gunslinger wrote: post #213
kenferry wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Er, I agree it's incredibly old, but also has been treated as societal ill and subject to regulation for its entire history.

Should cannabis and other currently illegal substances remain as such?

They should be extremely tightly regulated, which is all anyone is asking for here as well.

Re: Minnesota becomes first state to ban prediction markets

#248

Post by Shocka1 »

Silamoth wrote: post #232
ghaff wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ThAt's one of the interesting(?) aspects of prediction markets. Some meaningful percentage of people in the market need to be bringing some useful insight. If everyone is just making random guesses, the market isn't very useful (other than, perhaps, financially to the lucky).

What insights are being gained? Every time this topic comes up, I see someone vaguely mentioning insights from prediction markets. But no one ever has concrete examples - real or even hypothetical. Can you give an example of insights derived from prediction markets? Who benefited from the insights, and how did they act on the insights?

I would agree that the insights provided are little to none. I think this is some sort of fallacy that being being PR'd by tech bros with a lot of skin in the game attempting to come up with some kind of positive reason to sell to people. It's fairly easy to see right through it though.

WSJ had an insightful article that claimed .1% of the accounts take 67% of the profit, along with some other facts: https://www.wsj.com/finance/investing/polymarket-kalshi-bett...

Full disclosure, I've written performant market making algorithms for Polymarket. I'm actually a fan of these markets and enjoy the statistics and engineering challenges they present, but see it as a net negative on society. I'd gladly give up my PnL if it was a net positive on the American psych.

Re: Minnesota becomes first state to ban prediction markets

#249

Post by antiframe »

Robotbeat wrote: post #180
antiframe wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the tokens are worthless, where's the thrill in the gambling?

Just for love of the game.

Then what is the need for tokens? They must have /some/ value, even if its bragging rights or something. Otherwise I can just get the same thrill from guessing if there will be a rainbow tomorrow and seeing if I am right.

Re: Minnesota becomes first state to ban prediction markets

#250

Post by HoldOnAMinute »

behringer wrote: post #229
meta_gunslinger wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, instead of focusing on the rampant fraud happening under their watch they are focusing on consensual behaviour between adults.

There's rampant fraud on the "prediction markets".

How does it hurt anyone?

Whatever happened to "personal responsibility"?

It'e entertainment. Don't participate if you don't want to.

Post reply on HN