5 ms·

FBI seizes Polymarket CEO's phone, electronics

45 points by elsewhen 2y ago

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
Is this one of those actions that the Biden administration is trying to rush through before they leave office? To me as a taxpayer this feels like a waste of our resources. Why spend any effort on this instead of any number of other things, crimes with actual victims.
- Larrikin 2y ago
  Just because he is a rich programmer, doesn't make breaking the law ok.
  - blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
    We do not have infinite resources. People wagering on answers to interesting questions is free speech as far as I’m concerned.
    - llamaimperative 2y ago
      You have no clue why he's being investigated.
- bangaroo 2y ago
  there are a lot of problems with what you said, but to list a few: - the president doesn't directly control the fbi and i would argue that history shows the fbi is not particularly biased towards the democratic side of the ticket. - the ny post is bordering on a tabloid - it's not good journalism, and if you look, this story is basically just being carried by crypto news sites and well-known tabloids like the post and the daily mail. - what do you think is more likely - that they're cracking down on polymarket for "correctly guessing" the outcome of a 50/50 election? or maybe that the guy running a weird political bookmaker is engaged in some shady financial nonsense on the side? the only source saying that this is related to their "correct guess of the election" is unnamed and says it's their speculation. there's no proof. this is an occam's razor situation. the timing may be coincidental, but i would be shocked if the biden administration chose to enact its political vengeance on the ceo of a lottery site.
  - blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
    The FBI is an agency of the federal government and therefore under executive control, right? As for timing - I would not be shocked because there have been so many articles detailing how the administration and various politicians or special interest groups are pushing to implement various last-minute actions before they lose power. Why would the administration have less authority or urgency in the case of this agency versus any other?
  - readthenotes1 2y ago
    "history shows the fbi is not particularly biased towards the democratic side of the ticket." Peter Strozk and his lover might disagree with you
    - knowaveragejoe 2y ago
      This is one example in a sea of counter-examples.
      - readthenotes1 2y ago
        Since 2015? You get the Comey divulging yes Clinton had sensitive emails (but not Clinton's SoS office prioritized access based on donations to hen's(1) charity as shown in those emails). But a sea? I'd like to see... (1)Gendered pronouns are usually nonsense. I've appropriated the Swede's in most of my writing because the gender of the person I'm pronouning is almost always irrelevant, as in this case)
        knowaveragejoe 2y ago
        Eric Adams would like a word.
        readthenotes1 2y ago
        I think that's a counter example. His problems with the FBI started after he had the temerity to call out the border madness.
- cheema33 2y ago
  > crimes with actual victims If there is evidence of election interference, that would be very much a crime with victims.
  - OutOfHere 2y ago
    Is free speech election interference now?
    - mrkramer 2y ago
      Election interference is just a scary phrase for plain old propaganda; back in the day it was radio, flyers, billboards and posters and nowadays it is internet ads and spam. Same old stuff.
Simulacra 2y ago
The government is likely trying to accuse Polymarket of market manipulation and rigging its polls in favor of Trump, the source said. That is ridiculous, like saying a betting website can rig a football game. I guess it's possible but an election? This feels like Lawfare.
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  I would recommend not trusting an unnamed source's interpretation of another party's actions. They're not describing what they saw or what they know, they're describing what they think.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  My mind also went to lawfare, which there has been so much of from this administration and various states - not just concerning Trump but also Elon. Why care about this website that very few people have even heard of? Because it was the one place that did not predict a very close election outcome? Nate Silver accused pollsters of herding given all of them were painting every race as a toss up, and this seems like a good alternative source of information.
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    > Why care about this website that very few people have even heard of? Probably because there was credible belief of a criminal act, and probably not for the reasons that an unnamed source an NYPost article is conjecturing.
- adventured 2y ago
  They didn't say Polymarket rigged the election, you interpreted that incorrectly.
  - Simulacra 2y ago
    Article specifically says Polymarket, quote taken directly from the article.
josefritzishere 2y ago
If a gambling site predicted winners fraudulently, and enouraged you to bet on them... that's fraud. It doesnt matter if you win or lose. Both predicting and taking those bets is begging for that conflict of interest to arise. This guy could go to prison.
- ars 2y ago
  > predicted winners fraudulently How does someone do this fraudulently? Didn't they predict thing based on how people bet? Are you implying they faked the bets? > and taking those bets From my understanding they don't take bets, they match people who bet with each other.
  - Simulacra 2y ago
    Basically, it doesn't make any sense. Why did they wait until after the election?
    - llamaimperative 2y ago
      One obvious reason being that if they did it before the election, it'd definitely be considered election interference. DOJ has a policy of not taking major enforcement action in the political sphere for some period before an election.
pawelduda 2y ago
Wait until they find out about all the $TRUMP coins
mossTechnician 2y ago
I wonder if it has anything to do with this: "Polymarket Paid US Social Media Influencers for Election Content" https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-11-05/polymarket-paid-us-social-media-influencers-for-election-content https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-11-05/polymarke...
- legitster 2y ago
  I mean, in general, being headquartered in a country where your product is illegal is brazenly risky.
- dzhiurgis 2y ago
  Amazing. Musk is famously anti-short selling, yet put millions against Kamala.
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
    What does a political bet have to do with one selling company stock because they think the company will not continue to perform well in the market?
  - bayarearefugee 2y ago
    I don't care enough about Musk to know what his views on short selling are but him betting against Kamala is not remotely similar to short selling. Betting "against" outcome A is absolutely no different than betting "for" outcome B when there are only 2 possible outcomes of the election, its entirely semantics. And there is no unlimited downside to the bet like there (theoretically) is with short selling.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  It probably has to do with that. They paid for election content, but did not encourage betting. It just looks like general marketing for a platform. A more egregious example of paying for election content is the alleged scheme of a candidates paying for endorsements. To me that seems much more deceptive and fraudulent.
MrStonedOne 2y ago
[dead]
soulofmischief 2y ago
I fail to understand the issue. Both parties offer huge financial incentive to different groups of people for ensuring their victory by voting. We have entire industries based around this. Both candidates play to large corporations and benefactors, and money drives the election. It's part of why our election system is so broken. How is a prediction market worse than this such that it requires legal intervention?
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  You don't understand the issue because there's pretty much zero information about "the issue." The CEO of Polymarket is under FBI investigation. That's it. That's all the information anyone has. There's nothing "to understand" at this particular moment.
  - soulofmischief 2y ago
    Surely you understand that I'm speaking with respect to the information provided by the article's source, regardless of its veracity.
legitster 2y ago
> Coplan was not provided any reason for the incident, but the source said they expect it is political retribution since Polymarket accurately predicted Trump’s win – not traditional polls. > The government is likely trying to accuse Polymarket of market manipulation and rigging its polls in favor of Trump, the source said. The tabloid is rage baiting here. Prediction markets are still borderline illegal, and even ones done under the scrutiny of regulators (like PredictIt) are constantly investigated and close to being shut down. I could think of a number of large number of possible reasons that the FBI would want to raid an international, anonymous crypto-betting marketplace and almost none of them have to do with media pollsters (which are different than the private polls the campaigns ran, mind you!) convincing the FBI to raid the CEO. Especially considering the polls were not that far off and Trump won within the margin of error of the polling!
- mrkramer 2y ago
  I don't understand what's all the fuss about gambling?! Yes, it's somewhat bad, yes it's somewhat addictive but if you want to live in a liberal democracy you need to tolerate such things....like we tolerate alcohol and cigarettes for example. Imo gambling is not akin to hard drugs, that it should be per se illegal. The irony is that let's say Poker lobbyists have been sabotaging online poker for years saying that it is gambling and addictive and now 15 years later, more and more states are making it legal. The similar thing happened with sports betting which was made legal in 2018. Allow businesses to blossom and then regulate it, not vice versa.
avalys 2y ago
It seems more likely that this guy / this company did something shady and is trying to claim "political persecution" to distract attention from his actual misdeeds, than that the FBI is actually persecuting him, on behalf of the side that everyone universally acknowledges lost the election, a week after the election for running a website that correctly "predicted" they were going to lose. What would be the point of that?
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  Yep, almost certainly correct.
xyst 2y ago
I can’t believe nypost hit pieces and propaganda are posted here. Article has no substance and goes completely off speculation. If the raid was legal, then there will be a judge that signed off on the warrant. If nypost had any journalistic integrity, they would follow up on that except this is a celebrity tabloid at best.
- OutOfHere 2y ago
  I am not convinced that FBI raids require a judge to sign off. Only police raids would.

45 points by elsewhen 2y ago

Is this one of those actions that the Biden administration is trying to rush through before they leave office? To me as a taxpayer this feels like a waste of our resources. Why spend any effort on this instead of any number of other things, crimes with actual victims.

Larrikin 2y ago
Just because he is a rich programmer, doesn't make breaking the law ok.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  We do not have infinite resources. People wagering on answers to interesting questions is free speech as far as I’m concerned.
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    You have no clue why he's being investigated.
bangaroo 2y ago
there are a lot of problems with what you said, but to list a few: - the president doesn't directly control the fbi and i would argue that history shows the fbi is not particularly biased towards the democratic side of the ticket. - the ny post is bordering on a tabloid - it's not good journalism, and if you look, this story is basically just being carried by crypto news sites and well-known tabloids like the post and the daily mail. - what do you think is more likely - that they're cracking down on polymarket for "correctly guessing" the outcome of a 50/50 election? or maybe that the guy running a weird political bookmaker is engaged in some shady financial nonsense on the side? the only source saying that this is related to their "correct guess of the election" is unnamed and says it's their speculation. there's no proof. this is an occam's razor situation. the timing may be coincidental, but i would be shocked if the biden administration chose to enact its political vengeance on the ceo of a lottery site.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  The FBI is an agency of the federal government and therefore under executive control, right? As for timing - I would not be shocked because there have been so many articles detailing how the administration and various politicians or special interest groups are pushing to implement various last-minute actions before they lose power. Why would the administration have less authority or urgency in the case of this agency versus any other?
- readthenotes1 2y ago
  "history shows the fbi is not particularly biased towards the democratic side of the ticket." Peter Strozk and his lover might disagree with you
  - knowaveragejoe 2y ago
    This is one example in a sea of counter-examples.
    - readthenotes1 2y ago
      Since 2015? You get the Comey divulging yes Clinton had sensitive emails (but not Clinton's SoS office prioritized access based on donations to hen's(1) charity as shown in those emails). But a sea? I'd like to see... (1)Gendered pronouns are usually nonsense. I've appropriated the Swede's in most of my writing because the gender of the person I'm pronouning is almost always irrelevant, as in this case)
      - knowaveragejoe 2y ago
        Eric Adams would like a word.
        readthenotes1 2y ago
        I think that's a counter example. His problems with the FBI started after he had the temerity to call out the border madness.
cheema33 2y ago
> crimes with actual victims If there is evidence of election interference, that would be very much a crime with victims.
- OutOfHere 2y ago
  Is free speech election interference now?
  - mrkramer 2y ago
    Election interference is just a scary phrase for plain old propaganda; back in the day it was radio, flyers, billboards and posters and nowadays it is internet ads and spam. Same old stuff.

Simulacra 2y ago

The government is likely trying to accuse Polymarket of market manipulation and rigging its polls in favor of Trump, the source said. That is ridiculous, like saying a betting website can rig a football game. I guess it's possible but an election? This feels like Lawfare.

llamaimperative 2y ago
I would recommend not trusting an unnamed source's interpretation of another party's actions. They're not describing what they saw or what they know, they're describing what they think.
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
My mind also went to lawfare, which there has been so much of from this administration and various states - not just concerning Trump but also Elon. Why care about this website that very few people have even heard of? Because it was the one place that did not predict a very close election outcome? Nate Silver accused pollsters of herding given all of them were painting every race as a toss up, and this seems like a good alternative source of information.
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  > Why care about this website that very few people have even heard of? Probably because there was credible belief of a criminal act, and probably not for the reasons that an unnamed source an NYPost article is conjecturing.
adventured 2y ago
They didn't say Polymarket rigged the election, you interpreted that incorrectly.
- Simulacra 2y ago
  Article specifically says Polymarket, quote taken directly from the article.

josefritzishere 2y ago

If a gambling site predicted winners fraudulently, and enouraged you to bet on them... that's fraud. It doesnt matter if you win or lose. Both predicting and taking those bets is begging for that conflict of interest to arise. This guy could go to prison.

ars 2y ago
> predicted winners fraudulently How does someone do this fraudulently? Didn't they predict thing based on how people bet? Are you implying they faked the bets? > and taking those bets From my understanding they don't take bets, they match people who bet with each other.
- Simulacra 2y ago
  Basically, it doesn't make any sense. Why did they wait until after the election?
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    One obvious reason being that if they did it before the election, it'd definitely be considered election interference. DOJ has a policy of not taking major enforcement action in the political sphere for some period before an election.

pawelduda 2y ago

Wait until they find out about all the $TRUMP coins

mossTechnician 2y ago

I wonder if it has anything to do with this: "Polymarket Paid US Social Media Influencers for Election Content" https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-11-05/polymarket-paid-us-social-media-influencers-for-election-content https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-11-05/polymarke...

legitster 2y ago
I mean, in general, being headquartered in a country where your product is illegal is brazenly risky.
dzhiurgis 2y ago
Amazing. Musk is famously anti-short selling, yet put millions against Kamala.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
  What does a political bet have to do with one selling company stock because they think the company will not continue to perform well in the market?
- bayarearefugee 2y ago
  I don't care enough about Musk to know what his views on short selling are but him betting against Kamala is not remotely similar to short selling. Betting "against" outcome A is absolutely no different than betting "for" outcome B when there are only 2 possible outcomes of the election, its entirely semantics. And there is no unlimited downside to the bet like there (theoretically) is with short selling.
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
It probably has to do with that. They paid for election content, but did not encourage betting. It just looks like general marketing for a platform. A more egregious example of paying for election content is the alleged scheme of a candidates paying for endorsements. To me that seems much more deceptive and fraudulent.

MrStonedOne 2y ago

[dead]

soulofmischief 2y ago

I fail to understand the issue. Both parties offer huge financial incentive to different groups of people for ensuring their victory by voting. We have entire industries based around this. Both candidates play to large corporations and benefactors, and money drives the election. It's part of why our election system is so broken. How is a prediction market worse than this such that it requires legal intervention?

llamaimperative 2y ago
You don't understand the issue because there's pretty much zero information about "the issue." The CEO of Polymarket is under FBI investigation. That's it. That's all the information anyone has. There's nothing "to understand" at this particular moment.
- soulofmischief 2y ago
  Surely you understand that I'm speaking with respect to the information provided by the article's source, regardless of its veracity.

legitster 2y ago

> Coplan was not provided any reason for the incident, but the source said they expect it is political retribution since Polymarket accurately predicted Trump’s win – not traditional polls. > The government is likely trying to accuse Polymarket of market manipulation and rigging its polls in favor of Trump, the source said. The tabloid is rage baiting here. Prediction markets are still borderline illegal, and even ones done under the scrutiny of regulators (like PredictIt) are constantly investigated and close to being shut down. I could think of a number of large number of possible reasons that the FBI would want to raid an international, anonymous crypto-betting marketplace and almost none of them have to do with media pollsters (which are different than the private polls the campaigns ran, mind you!) convincing the FBI to raid the CEO. Especially considering the polls were not that far off and Trump won within the margin of error of the polling!

mrkramer 2y ago
I don't understand what's all the fuss about gambling?! Yes, it's somewhat bad, yes it's somewhat addictive but if you want to live in a liberal democracy you need to tolerate such things....like we tolerate alcohol and cigarettes for example. Imo gambling is not akin to hard drugs, that it should be per se illegal. The irony is that let's say Poker lobbyists have been sabotaging online poker for years saying that it is gambling and addictive and now 15 years later, more and more states are making it legal. The similar thing happened with sports betting which was made legal in 2018. Allow businesses to blossom and then regulate it, not vice versa.

avalys 2y ago

It seems more likely that this guy / this company did something shady and is trying to claim "political persecution" to distract attention from his actual misdeeds, than that the FBI is actually persecuting him, on behalf of the side that everyone universally acknowledges lost the election, a week after the election for running a website that correctly "predicted" they were going to lose. What would be the point of that?

llamaimperative 2y ago
Yep, almost certainly correct.

xyst 2y ago

I can’t believe nypost hit pieces and propaganda are posted here. Article has no substance and goes completely off speculation. If the raid was legal, then there will be a judge that signed off on the warrant. If nypost had any journalistic integrity, they would follow up on that except this is a celebrity tabloid at best.

OutOfHere 2y ago
I am not convinced that FBI raids require a judge to sign off. Only police raids would.