7 ms·

Minnesota becomes first state to ban prediction markets

785 points by ortusdux 5mo ago

VikingCoder 5mo ago
Anyone taking bets on how that ban will last?
- hootz 5mo ago
  Anyone taking bets on whether that bet will be available in prediction markets by the end of the week?
  - superfrank 5mo ago
    I hope someone is. From the bill: > EFFECTIVE DATE This section is effective August 1, 2026, and applies to crimes committed on or after that date.
everdrive 5mo ago
I wonder if it can really be enforced. It's clear that prediction markets are a scourge -- there seems to be no upside whatsoever.
- nom 5mo ago
  Thanks to crypto it can't be enforced and is here to stay, like all forms of online gambling.
  - tardedmeme 5mo ago
    Polymarket is not a dark web hidden service. It has owners with names and addresses known to the government.
- stock_toaster 5mo ago
  > I wonder if it can really be enforced. At the very least maybe it would make the advertising (tv, college campuses, etc) of prediction markets illegal in Minnesota? That alone seems like a good thing.
  - shawn-butler 5mo ago
    The law also goes after payment providers and network providers (vpn) etc if they "knowingly" provide service to anyone who engages in prediction market betting. The law[0] as written is a mess. You could in theory shut down the "legal" Minnesota state lottery that is otherwise carved out from the law by claiming they are providing data on outcomes via the internet if someone outside the state is betting on the outcome of the lottery in a prediction market. [0]: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2026/0/SF/4760/versions/ccr/0/ https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2026/0/SF/4760/versions/... (search for "ARTICLE 8")
- delichon 5mo ago
  I get a lot of value from prediction markets and query for them most days. Today for the Los Angeles Mayor's race and the Kentucky 4th district Representative race. In both cases I saw a big difference between the market and the vibe on my feeds. I believe that the market emits higher quality predictions. Each market is a community with a financial incentive to think outside of the bubble.
  - datadrivenangel 5mo ago
    prediction more easily allow people to convert money into public opinion, which is suboptimal.
- rizzom5000 5mo ago
  Do you also believe there is no upside in crowdsourced information found in, say, commodities, equities and futures markets?
  - free_bip 5mo ago
    Those are not the same as prediction markets
  - justonceokay 5mo ago
    Those markets create pressure to ensure that real physical goods and useful services are priced accurately. Prediction “markets“ are in my estimation no different than roulette. If you cross your eyes hard enough, you could claim that roulette gambling provides economic pressure to ensure that roulette wheels are balanced evenly. But when the roulette wheel is Vanah White’s dress color, what does that mean? Charitably, it’s a fun pass time. Through a dystopian lens, prediction markets pressure all public figures to play a kind of Keynsian Beauty Contest with their own behavior. Like social cooling for the celebrity/owning class.
- bronson 5mo ago
  No upside whatsoever? Clearly you're not an insider trader.
- tancop 5mo ago
  there is one upside, its a big incentive to indirectly leak things like album release dates and military operations. anything that helps get some secrets out is a positive in my book
  - kibwen 5mo ago
    No, this doesn't work. Predictions markets can only resolve to things that are publicly verifiable, so any leaked information is information that was destined to become public anyway. Furthermore, the leaker is disincentivized to leak in such a way that the act of leaking could compromise their insider knowlege; the structure of the markets means that leakers don't want you to have this information in any way that opponents could usefully invalidate. They're just gambling. I'm not trying to argue for or against gambling here, but please stop trying to delude yourselves into thinking these gambling sites are anything other than gambling.
    - plutaniano 5mo ago
      Unresolved markets transmit information too. A market doesn't need to resolve to transmit information.
      - kibwen 5mo ago
        Sure, and a white noise generator transmits information too.
  - freejazz 5mo ago
    But they don't get secrets out, they just make a bet? Show me any information like this on any of the prediction markets...
- superfrank 5mo ago
  > there seems to be no upside whatsoever There's the same upside as pretty much all other forms of gambling. Plenty of people enjoy it and it can be used to generate tax revenue for the state. Don't get me wrong, there's tons of harm that can come from it, but the arguments to allow them are essentially the same arguments for allowing sports betting.
  - kube-system 5mo ago
    This is true, however many of those arguments are weaker when applied to things for which the outcome is more consequential than the outcome of a sporting game.
    - superfrank 5mo ago
      Sure, but that's not really an argument to ban prediction markets, it's an argument to regulate what the public can or cannot bet on. Most major online sportsbooks have taken bets on the US presidential election for well over a decade. I can't imagine anyone really arguing that it's okay for DraftKings to offer that market, but not okay for Polymarket to offer it. I put it somewhere else in this thread, but there are actually two different questions that need to be answered separately. Are prediction markets just sportsbooks by another name and are there certain things that we should not allow people to gamble on. The argument around prediction markets always seems to squish those two into one which I think does people who want regulation a disservice. I think to most people, the answer to first question (are prediction markets just sportsbooks by another name) is a pretty resounding yes. The second question has a lot more room for debate though. Even if people agree that there should be things we don't allow people to bet on, there's still plenty to argue over where we draw the line. The problem is that as long as we mush these two together, people will use the disagreement over the second question to prevent action from being taken on the first.
      - kube-system 5mo ago
        > Sure, but that's not really an argument to ban prediction markets, it's an argument to regulate what the public can or cannot bet on. I wasn't making any argument above in either way. But the reality is that sports betting is not legal in much of the US. DraftKings is only legal in about half of US states. Minnesota does not permit DraftKings to operate in their state. They don't permit any kind of online gambling whatsoever, and I don't think they think any differently about Polymarket... and Minnesota's regulators have answered that clearly in this case by enumerating it specifically. And more generally speaking, laws apply to what someone is actually doing, not what they claim they are doing. If a law bans wagers on the outcome of a sporting event, it doesn't actually matter whether you call it something different. Someone can't sell crack cocaine and call it a "dietary supplement" and get away with it, because the law doesn't depend on the label the actor gave their own actions, it hinges on the definitions of the actions as defined under the law. And as for the second question, in gambling there's always a risk of harm to the bettors themselves. I don't think most Americans have a problem with that, currently. But, there's also risk to corrupting the subject of the bet itself. In a casino, this is easily mitigated by regulating the game, and the potential risk is only to the participants. In sports betting, this risks corrupting the games themselves. This is a slightly larger risk, and it risks corrupting sportsmanship for the athletes involved, but ultimately it is still a game. But wagering on other events up to and including literal war literally poses a much larger human risk than simply spoiling a game. You could take this "prediction market" laundering of words to an absurd conclusion: "A large binary option that someone will [insert any illegal action]" is just literally a payment for someone to do a crime using different words. > Most major online sportsbooks have taken bets on the US presidential election for well over a decade. I can't imagine anyone really arguing that it's okay for DraftKings to offer that market, but not okay for Polymarket to offer it. DraftKings is legal in about half of the US. It is not legal in Minnesota.
- ungreased0675 5mo ago
  Whenever I see something weird happen in a sports game, or even a lack of effort by individual players, my first thought is if sports betting was responsible.
- fasterik 5mo ago
  Information aggregation is the theoretical upside of prediction markets. Granted, their effectiveness in that role is an empirical question. For gambling in general, the upside is that people obviously enjoy it, not to mention the right/freedom to make choices about how one spends time and money as a responsible adult. If harm to the consumer and societal burden are the downsides you're concerned about, you could justify banning smoking, alcohol, and junk food for the same reasons. We don't generally do that because we recognize that where there's demand there will be a market, whether it's legal or illegal. So you also need to weigh the potential harms of a black market against those of a legal and regulated market.
- ghaff 5mo ago
  How is it different from the stock market?
  - ars 5mo ago
    Stocks are linked to entities that perform economic activity, i.e. make a profit, and share that profit. i.e. everyone can win. Predictions markets are just bets: one person wins, one loses.
    - criddell 5mo ago
      Options (especially 0DTE options) are a lot like sports betting.
      - ghaff 5mo ago
        And GameStop would probably like a minute (or maybe not) to discuss the tenuous connection between some underlying economic valuations and stock price. Yes, the stock market is underpinned by real economic activity. But, be real, there's a lot of essentially betting involved too.
- anon291 5mo ago
  Prediction markets ensure that there is always produce in your store.
  - dragonwriter 5mo ago
    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 legally a subtype of commodities market despite doing a very different thing than traditional commodities markets, but that’s an artifact of a legal definition being drawn in a very broad way at a time when it didn’t matter because nothing like prediction markets existed.
    - anon291 5mo ago
      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-details/cme-launch-hurricane-futures-and-options-futures-contract https://investor.cmegroup.com/news-releases/news-release-det...
1899-12-30 5mo ago
*Minnesota becomes first state to ban the use of prediction markets as a loophole for sports gambling.
mark212 5mo ago
as the article notes, prediction markets are regulated by the CFTC as a commodities futures contract, so I'm not sure how any state law survives a federal pre-emption challenge. On the other hand, it's a little unusual to see a federal agency suing to protect its turf. Would've expected a class action by a Minnesota user of the service to bring the challenge instead.
- ranger207 5mo ago
  I'm curious to see how this works out, because sports betting is _not_ in the CFTC's remit, and Kalshi etc's argument that states can't regulate them because they're not technically sports betting is contrary to the spirit of the law
  - nojito 5mo ago
    There’s no “house” or “book” aspect to Kalshi. They are nothing more than contracts that are bought and sold between individuals.
    - SoftTalker 5mo ago
      How do they make money?
      - nojito 5mo ago
        Just like other exchanges. They charge trading fees.
        hilariously 5mo ago
        What about the special partners that put up bets that are basically just methods to launder the fact that there's a house?
        dymk 5mo ago
        They also place their own bets within their own market. They don't just make money on trading fees.
SilverElfin 5mo ago
Doesn’t this violate commerce between states, effectively?
- tardedmeme 5mo ago
  It does, but the constitution's already been shredded and it's dog-eat-dog in the political space right now, so we'll see how it goes.
  - thrance 5mo ago
    SCOTUS will probably soon rule that extracting wealth from alienated gamblers is a fundamental American right, that the founding fathers had in mind when drafting the constitution.
- unethical_ban 5mo ago
  No. They're not banning prediction markets from out-of-state, they're banning it entirely. A state cannot ban out-of-state alcohol, but it can ban alcohol outright if it wanted to.
  - msandford 5mo ago
    Yeah but there's a difference there. I can buy alcohol out of state and if I bring it back in, that's on me. Does anyone think that Minnesotans who are out of MN at the time of their bet will be allowed to bet? I don't think they'll be allowed, but they should be.
    - unethical_ban 5mo ago
      I assume most people need to put on an address or credit card info linking them to their home state. They likely wouldn't be allowed to have an account.
tardedmeme 5mo ago
If a prediction market uses AI will this violate the federal ban on states impeding AI?
- foobarchu 5mo ago
  Using AI to identify the ideal neighborhoods to sell meth in doesn't mean it's legal to sell meth.
  - tardedmeme 5mo ago
    What if AI is trained on prediction market data?
steve1977 5mo ago
Isn't the stock market a prediction market as well?
- wnc3141 5mo ago
  I think the stocks don't have a arbiter managing a discrete outcome between parties that don't have any KYC compliance.
- foobarchu 5mo ago
  The difference in my mind is that prediction markets and gambling are betting on outcomes, not long term behaviors. You could make the argument that they are the same, in the sense that buying a stock is "betting" on a company to do well, but I think you'd be making a silly argument. Stocks are intangible these days, but they were traditionally a physical thing that one would trade. If you're betting on prediction markets, there's nothing to trade after the event happens, just payouts.
  - nojito 5mo ago
    Not exactly. Kalshi is binary options. Not stocks.
  - SoftTalker 5mo ago
    Stocks are shares of ownership. Now, in practice many people buy them as bets, but even those aren't really predictions. Prediction markets are time-boxed all-or-nothing plays. You are either correct, or you lose your entire stake.
- kube-system 5mo ago
  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.
  - michaelscott 5mo ago
cft 5mo ago
[flagged]
- numbsafari 5mo ago
  Do explain the Somalia connection you perceive. Please, go on…
  - _doctor_love 5mo ago
    Here's some troll food for ya: he's reaching Hacker News level of "noticing" /s
- abrowne 5mo ago
  There's plenty of legal gambling in Minnesota. To quote the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library it includes "horse racing, a card club at Canterbury Park, Indian tribal casinos, charitable gambling, and a state lottery." (https://www.lrl.mn.gov/guides/guides?issue=gambling https://www.lrl.mn.gov/guides/guides?issue=gambling)
  - hilariously 5mo ago
    If you're talking Minnesota its scratch offs and bingo all the way down.
  - bluGill 5mo ago
    There might be a couple more, but there is far less legal gambling in MN than anywhere else I've been in the US (though I have not been everywhere in the past 5 years, and I assume laws have changed enough to ignore experience older than that). Indian tribal casinos are only legal because they are in a separate country as far as the state is concerned. (they don't bother, but each reservation has a good case to join the UN if they wanted to)
    - jacobgkau 5mo ago
      > Indian tribal casinos are only legal because they are in a separate country as far as the state is concerned. (they don't bother, but each reservation has a good case to join the UN if they wanted to) A case for it, maybe, but I think the way you've worded this is a bit of an exaggeration. As you said, they're separate as far as the state is concerned, in some respects (even that's somewhat case-by-case and debatable). Comparatively, it's much more generally recognized that federal law does apply to tribes. The US calls tribes "domestic dependent nations," which is short of independent sovereignty, and the UN would generally only admit members who are recognized as independent and sovereign. Native American tribes are "separate countries" like states are separate countries-- in principle, kind of, but in practice, not really anymore. Individual states can work with UN bodies on projects (like California recently joining the UN health network), but they can't be admitted as members. All of that said, gambling is, of course, a very well-known thing that's allowed to happen on tribal lands.
calvinmorrison 5mo ago
[flagged]
superfrank 5mo ago
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 trading or morally wrong fall a bit flat when you realize that traditional sportsbooks let you bet on things like college basketball player props and the little league world series. I'm still not sure Minnesota will win their case, but it feels like that detail gives them a lot better chance of winning compared to many other states.
- ericmay 5mo ago
  I think you could make a case in separating the two, of course opening further discussion, but because sports betting takes place in a comparatively very controlled environment I think the risk profile is pretty different versus, idk, betting that the temperate will be at or above a certain point and then someone sticks a hair dryer on the thermostat[1]. Cheating can happen in sports of course, but the risk profile and real-world impact I think is quite a bit different. Worth discussing, but I think that's an important distinction. Separately, I believe over time that prediction markets will become the source of real world truth. Why? Because money is at stake and so validity and verification matter. It'll be interesting to see how, if this comes to fruition, how laws in states like Minnesota affect news reporting and journalism. It seems likely to me that at a certain point prediction markets will buy traditional media and news outlets to hire out the fact-finding and reporting teams to ensure ground truth, and of course to use journalism as the gateway to the market. So you read an article "China disappears random person" and then at the end you click a button and bet whether that person is alive or dead or whatever. [1] https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/options/articles/polymarket-just-paid-21-398-153000011.html https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/options/articles/polymarke...
  - superfrank 5mo ago
    > I think you could make a case in separating the two, of course opening further discussion, but because sports betting takes place in a comparatively very controlled environment I think the risk profile is pretty different versus, idk, betting that the temperate will be at or above a certain point and then someone sticks a hair dryer on the thermostat[1]. Cheating can happen in sports of course, but the risk profile and real-world impact I think is quite a bit different. Worth discussing, but I think that's an important distinction. That's kind of the point I was getting that. That's not really an argument about prediction markets, it's about what things should we be allowed to bet on. I'm looking at FanDuel right now and I can bet on 1v1 eSports games of FIFA. The bets aren't even just who will win, but it's things like how many goals will a team score or who will score first. During the last Superbowl books were offering bets on things like what color tie the announcers would wear. I get that there's maybe a slight difference between that and betting on what words a sports announcer will say during the broadcast, but IMO, you're splitting hairs. They're both very easily to manipulate and very open to insider trading. I think you probably agree with this, but IMO, there needs to be two separate conversations. One, are prediction markets sportsbooks by another name? Two, are there certain markets that we should not allow betting on? Personally, I think the answer to both of those is yes, but I think if you smush them together into one conversation it makes things really messy.
OsrsNeedsf2P 5mo ago
> The prohibition extends to services supporting prediction markets, like virtual private networks, that could allow consumers to disguise their location and get around the ban. I'm sorry, what the fuck?
- kube-system 5mo ago
  That's a creative interpretation by NPR. The law doesn't mention VPNs. The law bans: > provid[ing] supportive services to a prediction market or consumer knowing that the services will be used to identify a consumer’s location, transfer money, or make or process payments for the purpose of allowing consumers to make wagers or to settle wagers made by consumers in violation of this section. "knowing" is key here.
sergiotapia 5mo ago
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.
- kube-system 5mo ago
  I've seen a lot of YouTube ads recently for illegal gambling apps
- nozzlegear 5mo ago
  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 they'll win or lose Twitch chat points alongside him.
  - ziml77 5mo ago
    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.
mghackerlady 5mo ago
Love it here, only sane state there is these days. Everywhere else is either brain dead, too hot, or too mean
rebekkamikkoa 5mo ago
It’s hard to pretend this isn’t at least gambling-adjacent when most people are simply betting on outcomes.
- elictronic 5mo ago
  It’s easy to pretend, just really hard to convince anyone without a direct financial interest.
- jeltz 5mo ago
  Given that exactly the same thing has been regulated as gambling in Europe under the name "betting exchange" for 25 years the case for it being gambling is quite strong.
- anon291 5mo ago
  It's gambling sure and gambling should generally be legal. People are bizarrely puritanical about this.
CPLX 5mo ago
They've been banned for generations. It's called gambling. Of course, we all have to sit through another round of Silicon Valley pretending they've discovered some new exciting business model that's just vice. Unlicensed gypsy cabs, SROs, shift work, patent medicines, narcotics dealing, customs fraud, and smuggling already had established market entrants I guess.
- chairmansteve 5mo ago
  You left out ponzi schemes, aka crypto.
- anon291 5mo ago
  Gambling works and is normal in most of the world. No idea why the USA is puritanical about this. It's like the oldest business on the planet.
  - kenferry 5mo ago
    Er, I agree it's incredibly old, but also has been treated as societal ill and subject to regulation for its entire history.
    - Gagarin1917 5mo ago
      Wanting to control the non-violent actions of others is also a social ill. Just one most haven’t woken up to yet.
    - meta_gunslinger 5mo ago
      Should cannabis and other currently illegal substances remain as such?
      - kenferry 5mo ago
        I mean, I don't think we should legalize Fentanyl.
      - ziml77 5mo ago
Imnimo 5mo ago
I could imagine cases where prediction markets could offer some actual insight, but in practice they seem few and far between. Most markets I've seen devolve into one or more of: betting on unimportant events (e.g. sports games), insider trading, or poorly written ambiguous resolution criteria. It's just hard for me to imagine that, on net, these markets will offer more societal good than the harm we've seen from sports betting.
- throwaway613746 5mo ago
  [dead]
- LewisVerstappen 5mo ago
  Insider trading does offer actual insight
- bobbylarrybobby 5mo ago
  Getting inside traders to publicize their knowledge for a price is like half of the point of prediction markets
  - DanielVZ 5mo ago
    Does polymarket then have a full profile of its users to be able to distinguish insider trades vs noise? Genuine question as I haven’t used the site and everything I know about them are comments and some articles.
  - Silamoth 5mo ago
    I asked this elsewhere, but do you have an example of this knowledge? Have prediction markets ever revealed genuine knowledge? If so, has anyone ever acted on the newly revealed knowledge in a meaningful way?
- autoexec 5mo ago
  > I could imagine cases where prediction markets could offer some actual insight I could imagine that there's very little insight to be gained when some 23 year old has so little hope for his financial future that he's spending some of what he earned last night delivering food for uber eats on making a completely uninformed bet on a geopolitical situation involving a country he couldn't even find on a map just in case it pays out well enough that he can afford some of the needed medical care he's been putting off. That's the type of user I imagine most people participating in prediction markets are. It's telling that the vast majority of the people making bets lose their money. Are their predictions really valuable data?
Robotbeat 5mo ago
Does this ban the prediction markets that don’t use real money but instead tokens that are worthless?
- antiframe 5mo ago
  If the tokens are worthless, where's the thrill in the gambling?
  - Robotbeat 5mo ago
    Just for love of the game.
    - antiframe 5mo ago
      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.
yamillove 5mo ago
It would be good if they banned Learing Centers.
- behringer 5mo ago
  They do ban fraudulant learning centers...
kklisura 5mo ago
Cue in the talking heads to tell us how devastating this ban is.
kyledrake 5mo ago
They're not going to get rid of them, they're just going to drive them underground, which will make them impossible to regulate, which will make using them less safe. I don't participate in prediction markets, but I would bet everything I own on this outcome.
- wizzwizz4 5mo ago
  Making using them less safe means that certain kinds of better are less likely to use them, which may be a purpose of this legislation.
  - tyg13 5mo ago
    Exactly. I see this common idea trotted out that "where there's a will, there's a way" -- if the government bans something, the ban will never be effective, because people still want that thing, and so a ban will just encourage violating the law. But that's highly contingent on that thing being something people are willing to violate the law over, and on the convenience of that thing not being significantly impacted by prohibition. Neither of which are true for prediction betting (it's almost identical to sports betting in that regard, imo.) The only reason these markets proliferate is precisely because they are legal.
  - peferron 5mo ago
    Especially if there's also a ban on related advertising. Polymarket and others are absolutely flooding the world with ads at the moment.
- tempaccountabcd 5mo ago
  [dead]
- kube-system 5mo ago
  That's already what it is. They are an underground gambling site pretending that they're not doing things that they literally do by calling it something else. They're like a drug dealer who thinks they're slick by calling their drugs "research chemicals".
jongjong 5mo ago
They should ban the stock market as well then since the stock market is essentially just a prediction market.
- behringer 5mo ago
  That would be awesome.
michaefe 5mo ago
While it's obviously sports betting, the fact is that federal law gives the CFTC the power to determine what is and isn't a future and expressly preempts state intervention in futures markets. And, the case as to why futures markets generally should be subject only to federal oversight is quite strong IMO. So, the case can quickly become whether or not the CFTC should consider sports betting to be a future, and judges typically defer to the executive branch when it's not obvious (and in this case I don't think it is, the bar owner in Philly hedging an Eagles loss is an entirely plausible, albeit unlikely and uncommon, situation). While I am partial to the argument that the CFTC is actually taking away the states' 10th Amendment police power right, that is a somewhat tenuous case in comparison to the enumerated right of the federal government to provide sole jurisdiction to the executive branch to enforce a law (and not to mention a law that impacts interstate commerce). I imagine Minnesota loses this case and what's far more likely is either a more liberal congress changes what is a future by law or a more liberal executive branch reduces the protections for Kalshi et al.
- yieldcrv 5mo ago
  90% agree, the CFTC doesn't consider these futures contracts, it regulates them under its "contract market" authority, that Congress designated and updated periodically over time This is the authority on the CFTC's own website on prediction markets "For more information" section https://www.cftc.gov/LearnandProtect/PredictionMarkets https://www.cftc.gov/LearnandProtect/PredictionMarkets https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?hl=false&edition=prelim&path=&req=granuleid%3AUSC-prelim-title7-section7&fq=&num=0&saved=%7CZ3JhbnVsZWlkOlVTQy1wcmVsaW0tdGl0bGU3LXNlY3Rpb243%7C%7C%7C0%7Cfalse%7Cprelim https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?hl=false&edition=prelim&... And yes, both the Supremacy clause and the Interstate commerce clause neutralize any 10th amendment claim, unless the Federal government or any of its agencies was completely mum on the activity. But since the Federal government has exerted authority over that industry, via the interstate commerce clause, states can pound sand.
  - michaefe 5mo ago
    Oh interesting, I didn't know that about the contract market authority.
jmyeet 5mo ago
Remember in the late 2010s when the hack Ajit Pai, then fCC Chair, said that the FCC couldn't or shouldn't enforce Obama-era Title 8 net neutrality? Remember how states like California then said "OK, it's not a federal issue so we'll do it at the state level"? Then remember how the DoJ, at the FCC's direction, sued California [1]? Well, which is it? Was net neutrality a state or federal issue? The answer is it's, as always, a Schrodinger's STate's rights issue. That is, it's a "state's rights" issue when it suits them, a federal issue when it suits them and it's neither when it suits them. Lack of any kind of regulation is the goal. This isn't some libertarian pipe dream. It's just naked pro-company and pro-billionaire gutting of government to boost profits. Fast forward to prediction markets. The CFTC regulates this (arguably). Another deregulation hack is in charge. And again, states like Minnesota who already ban sports betting are being sued. "State's rights" btw. We're seeing the exact same pattern. This on the same day that the president who sued the IRS, which was defended by the president's DoJ and the recess appointee Attorney-General settled a $10 billion lawsuit right as a federal judge tosses it because the case lacked adversity [2]. Besides the J6 slush fund, part of this settlement is that the IRS is barred from ever investigating Trump, his family or the Trump Organization for tax fraud. The level of corruption and kleptocracy here is beyond belief and what's really frightening is that a good 35-40% of the population not only don't care but actively support something they will never benefit from and there hasn't been (and won't be) any political price paid for any of it. The president's endorsement still carries weight and just today, we've had the most expensive Congressional primary in history (~$35 million) where Trump unseated a sitting Congressmen for daring to push for releasing the Epstein files. [1]: https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-files-net-neutrality-lawsuit-against-state-california-0 https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-f... [2]: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/insight/trump-eyes-1-776b-irs-settlement-fund-amid-backlash/gm-GM44E85EB1?gemSnapshotKey=GM44E85EB1-snapshot-15 https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/insight/trump-eyes-1-776b-irs... [3]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2026/05/19/blanche-faces-capitol-hill-grilling-18b-anti-weaponization-fund/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2026/05/19/...
HoldOnAMinute 5mo ago
What a waste of time and energy
- meta_gunslinger 5mo ago
  Agreed, instead of focusing on the rampant fraud happening under their watch they are focusing on consensual behaviour between adults.
  - behringer 5mo ago
    There's rampant fraud on the "prediction markets".
    - HoldOnAMinute 5mo ago
      How does it hurt anyone? Whatever happened to "personal responsibility"? It'e entertainment. Don't participate if you don't want to.
      - behringer 5mo ago
        it's personal responsibility to get taken by a business? I don't think so.
seliopou 5mo ago
The CFTC commission comprises five seats, four of which are currently vacant: https://www.cftc.gov/About/Commissioners/index.htm https://www.cftc.gov/About/Commissioners/index.htm
Zopieux 5mo ago
Congrats Minnesota and good luck with enforcement.
socalgal2 5mo ago
What did the prediction markets predict for this? Theoretically, if they're good at predicting then they should have predicted they'd be banned
throwawa1 5mo ago
This is great news. From my perspective from someone who grew up in the 90s, America feels like we took the turn towards Biff Tannen's Pleasure Paradise. A future very fa from our promise filled with gambling, social degradation, and worse economic prospects for everyone. Gambling sites like Polymarket are just a symptom. More states need to move in this direction, because its just a tax levied on the uninformed to insider cashing in
- matttproud 5mo ago
  Good on Minnesota.
  - UberFly 5mo ago
    Not even. Minnesota is fine with betting as long as it is tribal betting and lawmakers are getting their share of the cut. Look it up.
    - matttproud 5mo ago
      I lived there, and I am familiar with that. I would be happy if they did away with all of it, including the state-administered lottery. But this is a great start of low-hanging fruit.
      - deflator 5mo ago
        Once a vice is taxed, it becomes a budget line item for the local government and is much harder to get rid of
    - bequanna 5mo ago
      Exactly. This is not a law to protect people, this is a law to protect entrenched special interests (Reservation and State-owned casinos).
- baggachipz 5mo ago
  And Biff is the president D:
jimmygrapes 5mo ago
They're only doing this because they know Brock "Legnar" is gonna win at Summerslam /s but not /s iykyk
abustamam 5mo ago
> The prohibition extends to services supporting prediction markets, like virtual private networks, that could allow consumers to disguise their location and get around the ban. Yikes. I am all for banning prediction markets but I feel like this is overreaching.
- tty456 5mo ago
  Does it actually ban VPNs? or just ban VPNs from being used to access prediction markets?
- mnahkies 5mo ago
  Yeah that seems like a massive reach. Does banking count as a "supporting service"? After all a prediction market isn't very useful if you can't get money in/out.
  - abustamam 5mo ago
    I think "supporting services" is in reference to ways to disguise the location, which is why they used VPN as an example. I don't know how they will enforce it but the fact that they want to control it is concerning.
- Broken_Hippo 5mo ago
  If you don't actually sell someone something illegal, but take them to buy illegal things using the safety of your car so they avoid detection - are you innocent? Drinking and driving exists and is illegal, but going to the grocery store isn't. Should we do an all or nothing sort of ban, either allowing drunk driving or banning cars altogether? No one would do this - some uses are illegal, most aren't. A law that allows legal uses of your car but disallows illegal activity isn't all that unheard of.
  - chadgpt3 5mo ago
    If you are a taxi company and a bank robber takes a taxi to the bank, are you innocent?
joelthelion 5mo ago
I hope play money prediction markets are untouched. They are useful and fun, and as far as I know, dont have the downsides of real prediction markets.
3vo-ai 5mo ago
[dead]
gigatexal 5mo ago
Maybe the states will save us when the Federal government finally succumbs to the cancer that is Trump.
iamkrazy 5mo ago
[flagged]
- meta_gunslinger 5mo ago
  No, the scammers running those are voting for them.
steveBK123 5mo ago
I think in 10 years we'll see the rise of online sports betting, including in prediction markets form, as a new opioids epidemic. For some amount of people they use it recreationally to blow off some steam, but theres a segment of the population that ruins their lives on it. In some sense it may be worse than opioids because a husband (its always the guy) can ruin their families finances in secret before the wife's credit card gets declines & she pulls on the threads to find six figures of hidden debt from it and realize they are about to lose their home. In some ways, historically having gambling located in specific geographic areas that were not within most peoples daily travel routine ensured safer use.
theiz 5mo ago
One of the biggest commodity trading companies is in Minnesota (Cargill), where I would think that commodities are a prediction market too: They predict the harvest and relate that to a future price. Also there are quite some real estate investors in Minnesota, also due to tax arrangements. Wonder how that will pan out.
edge_trader_41 5mo ago
[dead]

785 points by ortusdux 5mo ago

VikingCoder 5mo ago

Anyone taking bets on how that ban will last?

hootz 5mo ago
Anyone taking bets on whether that bet will be available in prediction markets by the end of the week?
- superfrank 5mo ago
  I hope someone is. From the bill: > EFFECTIVE DATE This section is effective August 1, 2026, and applies to crimes committed on or after that date.

everdrive 5mo ago

I wonder if it can really be enforced. It's clear that prediction markets are a scourge -- there seems to be no upside whatsoever.

nom 5mo ago
Thanks to crypto it can't be enforced and is here to stay, like all forms of online gambling.
- tardedmeme 5mo ago
  Polymarket is not a dark web hidden service. It has owners with names and addresses known to the government.
stock_toaster 5mo ago
> I wonder if it can really be enforced. At the very least maybe it would make the advertising (tv, college campuses, etc) of prediction markets illegal in Minnesota? That alone seems like a good thing.
- shawn-butler 5mo ago
  The law also goes after payment providers and network providers (vpn) etc if they "knowingly" provide service to anyone who engages in prediction market betting. The law[0] as written is a mess. You could in theory shut down the "legal" Minnesota state lottery that is otherwise carved out from the law by claiming they are providing data on outcomes via the internet if someone outside the state is betting on the outcome of the lottery in a prediction market. [0]: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2026/0/SF/4760/versions/ccr/0/ https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/94/2026/0/SF/4760/versions/... (search for "ARTICLE 8")
delichon 5mo ago
I get a lot of value from prediction markets and query for them most days. Today for the Los Angeles Mayor's race and the Kentucky 4th district Representative race. In both cases I saw a big difference between the market and the vibe on my feeds. I believe that the market emits higher quality predictions. Each market is a community with a financial incentive to think outside of the bubble.
- datadrivenangel 5mo ago
  prediction more easily allow people to convert money into public opinion, which is suboptimal.
rizzom5000 5mo ago
Do you also believe there is no upside in crowdsourced information found in, say, commodities, equities and futures markets?
- free_bip 5mo ago
  Those are not the same as prediction markets
- justonceokay 5mo ago
  Those markets create pressure to ensure that real physical goods and useful services are priced accurately. Prediction “markets“ are in my estimation no different than roulette. If you cross your eyes hard enough, you could claim that roulette gambling provides economic pressure to ensure that roulette wheels are balanced evenly. But when the roulette wheel is Vanah White’s dress color, what does that mean? Charitably, it’s a fun pass time. Through a dystopian lens, prediction markets pressure all public figures to play a kind of Keynsian Beauty Contest with their own behavior. Like social cooling for the celebrity/owning class.
bronson 5mo ago
No upside whatsoever? Clearly you're not an insider trader.
tancop 5mo ago
there is one upside, its a big incentive to indirectly leak things like album release dates and military operations. anything that helps get some secrets out is a positive in my book
- kibwen 5mo ago
  No, this doesn't work. Predictions markets can only resolve to things that are publicly verifiable, so any leaked information is information that was destined to become public anyway. Furthermore, the leaker is disincentivized to leak in such a way that the act of leaking could compromise their insider knowlege; the structure of the markets means that leakers don't want you to have this information in any way that opponents could usefully invalidate. They're just gambling. I'm not trying to argue for or against gambling here, but please stop trying to delude yourselves into thinking these gambling sites are anything other than gambling.
  - plutaniano 5mo ago
    Unresolved markets transmit information too. A market doesn't need to resolve to transmit information.
    - kibwen 5mo ago
      Sure, and a white noise generator transmits information too.
- freejazz 5mo ago
  But they don't get secrets out, they just make a bet? Show me any information like this on any of the prediction markets...
superfrank 5mo ago
> there seems to be no upside whatsoever There's the same upside as pretty much all other forms of gambling. Plenty of people enjoy it and it can be used to generate tax revenue for the state. Don't get me wrong, there's tons of harm that can come from it, but the arguments to allow them are essentially the same arguments for allowing sports betting.
- kube-system 5mo ago
  This is true, however many of those arguments are weaker when applied to things for which the outcome is more consequential than the outcome of a sporting game.
  - superfrank 5mo ago
    Sure, but that's not really an argument to ban prediction markets, it's an argument to regulate what the public can or cannot bet on. Most major online sportsbooks have taken bets on the US presidential election for well over a decade. I can't imagine anyone really arguing that it's okay for DraftKings to offer that market, but not okay for Polymarket to offer it. I put it somewhere else in this thread, but there are actually two different questions that need to be answered separately. Are prediction markets just sportsbooks by another name and are there certain things that we should not allow people to gamble on. The argument around prediction markets always seems to squish those two into one which I think does people who want regulation a disservice. I think to most people, the answer to first question (are prediction markets just sportsbooks by another name) is a pretty resounding yes. The second question has a lot more room for debate though. Even if people agree that there should be things we don't allow people to bet on, there's still plenty to argue over where we draw the line. The problem is that as long as we mush these two together, people will use the disagreement over the second question to prevent action from being taken on the first.
    - kube-system 5mo ago
      > Sure, but that's not really an argument to ban prediction markets, it's an argument to regulate what the public can or cannot bet on. I wasn't making any argument above in either way. But the reality is that sports betting is not legal in much of the US. DraftKings is only legal in about half of US states. Minnesota does not permit DraftKings to operate in their state. They don't permit any kind of online gambling whatsoever, and I don't think they think any differently about Polymarket... and Minnesota's regulators have answered that clearly in this case by enumerating it specifically. And more generally speaking, laws apply to what someone is actually doing, not what they claim they are doing. If a law bans wagers on the outcome of a sporting event, it doesn't actually matter whether you call it something different. Someone can't sell crack cocaine and call it a "dietary supplement" and get away with it, because the law doesn't depend on the label the actor gave their own actions, it hinges on the definitions of the actions as defined under the law. And as for the second question, in gambling there's always a risk of harm to the bettors themselves. I don't think most Americans have a problem with that, currently. But, there's also risk to corrupting the subject of the bet itself. In a casino, this is easily mitigated by regulating the game, and the potential risk is only to the participants. In sports betting, this risks corrupting the games themselves. This is a slightly larger risk, and it risks corrupting sportsmanship for the athletes involved, but ultimately it is still a game. But wagering on other events up to and including literal war literally poses a much larger human risk than simply spoiling a game. You could take this "prediction market" laundering of words to an absurd conclusion: "A large binary option that someone will [insert any illegal action]" is just literally a payment for someone to do a crime using different words. > Most major online sportsbooks have taken bets on the US presidential election for well over a decade. I can't imagine anyone really arguing that it's okay for DraftKings to offer that market, but not okay for Polymarket to offer it. DraftKings is legal in about half of the US. It is not legal in Minnesota.
ungreased0675 5mo ago
Whenever I see something weird happen in a sports game, or even a lack of effort by individual players, my first thought is if sports betting was responsible.
fasterik 5mo ago
Information aggregation is the theoretical upside of prediction markets. Granted, their effectiveness in that role is an empirical question. For gambling in general, the upside is that people obviously enjoy it, not to mention the right/freedom to make choices about how one spends time and money as a responsible adult. If harm to the consumer and societal burden are the downsides you're concerned about, you could justify banning smoking, alcohol, and junk food for the same reasons. We don't generally do that because we recognize that where there's demand there will be a market, whether it's legal or illegal. So you also need to weigh the potential harms of a black market against those of a legal and regulated market.
ghaff 5mo ago
How is it different from the stock market?
- ars 5mo ago
  Stocks are linked to entities that perform economic activity, i.e. make a profit, and share that profit. i.e. everyone can win. Predictions markets are just bets: one person wins, one loses.
  - criddell 5mo ago
    Options (especially 0DTE options) are a lot like sports betting.
    - ghaff 5mo ago
      And GameStop would probably like a minute (or maybe not) to discuss the tenuous connection between some underlying economic valuations and stock price. Yes, the stock market is underpinned by real economic activity. But, be real, there's a lot of essentially betting involved too.
anon291 5mo ago
Prediction markets ensure that there is always produce in your store.
- dragonwriter 5mo ago
  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 legally a subtype of commodities market despite doing a very different thing than traditional commodities markets, but that’s an artifact of a legal definition being drawn in a very broad way at a time when it didn’t matter because nothing like prediction markets existed.
  - anon291 5mo ago
    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-details/cme-launch-hurricane-futures-and-options-futures-contract https://investor.cmegroup.com/news-releases/news-release-det...

1899-12-30 5mo ago

*Minnesota becomes first state to ban the use of prediction markets as a loophole for sports gambling.

mark212 5mo ago

as the article notes, prediction markets are regulated by the CFTC as a commodities futures contract, so I'm not sure how any state law survives a federal pre-emption challenge. On the other hand, it's a little unusual to see a federal agency suing to protect its turf. Would've expected a class action by a Minnesota user of the service to bring the challenge instead.

ranger207 5mo ago
I'm curious to see how this works out, because sports betting is _not_ in the CFTC's remit, and Kalshi etc's argument that states can't regulate them because they're not technically sports betting is contrary to the spirit of the law
- nojito 5mo ago
  There’s no “house” or “book” aspect to Kalshi. They are nothing more than contracts that are bought and sold between individuals.
  - SoftTalker 5mo ago
    How do they make money?
    - nojito 5mo ago
      Just like other exchanges. They charge trading fees.
      - hilariously 5mo ago
        What about the special partners that put up bets that are basically just methods to launder the fact that there's a house?
      - dymk 5mo ago
        They also place their own bets within their own market. They don't just make money on trading fees.

SilverElfin 5mo ago

Doesn’t this violate commerce between states, effectively?

tardedmeme 5mo ago
It does, but the constitution's already been shredded and it's dog-eat-dog in the political space right now, so we'll see how it goes.
- thrance 5mo ago
  SCOTUS will probably soon rule that extracting wealth from alienated gamblers is a fundamental American right, that the founding fathers had in mind when drafting the constitution.
unethical_ban 5mo ago
No. They're not banning prediction markets from out-of-state, they're banning it entirely. A state cannot ban out-of-state alcohol, but it can ban alcohol outright if it wanted to.
- msandford 5mo ago
  Yeah but there's a difference there. I can buy alcohol out of state and if I bring it back in, that's on me. Does anyone think that Minnesotans who are out of MN at the time of their bet will be allowed to bet? I don't think they'll be allowed, but they should be.
  - unethical_ban 5mo ago
    I assume most people need to put on an address or credit card info linking them to their home state. They likely wouldn't be allowed to have an account.

tardedmeme 5mo ago

If a prediction market uses AI will this violate the federal ban on states impeding AI?

foobarchu 5mo ago
Using AI to identify the ideal neighborhoods to sell meth in doesn't mean it's legal to sell meth.
- tardedmeme 5mo ago
  What if AI is trained on prediction market data?

steve1977 5mo ago

Isn't the stock market a prediction market as well?

wnc3141 5mo ago
I think the stocks don't have a arbiter managing a discrete outcome between parties that don't have any KYC compliance.
foobarchu 5mo ago
The difference in my mind is that prediction markets and gambling are betting on outcomes, not long term behaviors. You could make the argument that they are the same, in the sense that buying a stock is "betting" on a company to do well, but I think you'd be making a silly argument. Stocks are intangible these days, but they were traditionally a physical thing that one would trade. If you're betting on prediction markets, there's nothing to trade after the event happens, just payouts.
- nojito 5mo ago
  Not exactly. Kalshi is binary options. Not stocks.
- SoftTalker 5mo ago
  Stocks are shares of ownership. Now, in practice many people buy them as bets, but even those aren't really predictions. Prediction markets are time-boxed all-or-nothing plays. You are either correct, or you lose your entire stake.
kube-system 5mo ago
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.
- michaelscott 5mo ago

cft 5mo ago

[flagged]

numbsafari 5mo ago
Do explain the Somalia connection you perceive. Please, go on…
- _doctor_love 5mo ago
  Here's some troll food for ya: he's reaching Hacker News level of "noticing" /s
abrowne 5mo ago
There's plenty of legal gambling in Minnesota. To quote the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library it includes "horse racing, a card club at Canterbury Park, Indian tribal casinos, charitable gambling, and a state lottery." (https://www.lrl.mn.gov/guides/guides?issue=gambling https://www.lrl.mn.gov/guides/guides?issue=gambling)
- hilariously 5mo ago
  If you're talking Minnesota its scratch offs and bingo all the way down.
- bluGill 5mo ago
  There might be a couple more, but there is far less legal gambling in MN than anywhere else I've been in the US (though I have not been everywhere in the past 5 years, and I assume laws have changed enough to ignore experience older than that). Indian tribal casinos are only legal because they are in a separate country as far as the state is concerned. (they don't bother, but each reservation has a good case to join the UN if they wanted to)
  - jacobgkau 5mo ago
    > Indian tribal casinos are only legal because they are in a separate country as far as the state is concerned. (they don't bother, but each reservation has a good case to join the UN if they wanted to) A case for it, maybe, but I think the way you've worded this is a bit of an exaggeration. As you said, they're separate as far as the state is concerned, in some respects (even that's somewhat case-by-case and debatable). Comparatively, it's much more generally recognized that federal law does apply to tribes. The US calls tribes "domestic dependent nations," which is short of independent sovereignty, and the UN would generally only admit members who are recognized as independent and sovereign. Native American tribes are "separate countries" like states are separate countries-- in principle, kind of, but in practice, not really anymore. Individual states can work with UN bodies on projects (like California recently joining the UN health network), but they can't be admitted as members. All of that said, gambling is, of course, a very well-known thing that's allowed to happen on tribal lands.

calvinmorrison 5mo ago

[flagged]

superfrank 5mo ago

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 trading or morally wrong fall a bit flat when you realize that traditional sportsbooks let you bet on things like college basketball player props and the little league world series. I'm still not sure Minnesota will win their case, but it feels like that detail gives them a lot better chance of winning compared to many other states.

ericmay 5mo ago
I think you could make a case in separating the two, of course opening further discussion, but because sports betting takes place in a comparatively very controlled environment I think the risk profile is pretty different versus, idk, betting that the temperate will be at or above a certain point and then someone sticks a hair dryer on the thermostat[1]. Cheating can happen in sports of course, but the risk profile and real-world impact I think is quite a bit different. Worth discussing, but I think that's an important distinction. Separately, I believe over time that prediction markets will become the source of real world truth. Why? Because money is at stake and so validity and verification matter. It'll be interesting to see how, if this comes to fruition, how laws in states like Minnesota affect news reporting and journalism. It seems likely to me that at a certain point prediction markets will buy traditional media and news outlets to hire out the fact-finding and reporting teams to ensure ground truth, and of course to use journalism as the gateway to the market. So you read an article "China disappears random person" and then at the end you click a button and bet whether that person is alive or dead or whatever. [1] https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/options/articles/polymarket-just-paid-21-398-153000011.html https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/options/articles/polymarke...
- superfrank 5mo ago
  > I think you could make a case in separating the two, of course opening further discussion, but because sports betting takes place in a comparatively very controlled environment I think the risk profile is pretty different versus, idk, betting that the temperate will be at or above a certain point and then someone sticks a hair dryer on the thermostat[1]. Cheating can happen in sports of course, but the risk profile and real-world impact I think is quite a bit different. Worth discussing, but I think that's an important distinction. That's kind of the point I was getting that. That's not really an argument about prediction markets, it's about what things should we be allowed to bet on. I'm looking at FanDuel right now and I can bet on 1v1 eSports games of FIFA. The bets aren't even just who will win, but it's things like how many goals will a team score or who will score first. During the last Superbowl books were offering bets on things like what color tie the announcers would wear. I get that there's maybe a slight difference between that and betting on what words a sports announcer will say during the broadcast, but IMO, you're splitting hairs. They're both very easily to manipulate and very open to insider trading. I think you probably agree with this, but IMO, there needs to be two separate conversations. One, are prediction markets sportsbooks by another name? Two, are there certain markets that we should not allow betting on? Personally, I think the answer to both of those is yes, but I think if you smush them together into one conversation it makes things really messy.

OsrsNeedsf2P 5mo ago

> The prohibition extends to services supporting prediction markets, like virtual private networks, that could allow consumers to disguise their location and get around the ban. I'm sorry, what the fuck?

kube-system 5mo ago
That's a creative interpretation by NPR. The law doesn't mention VPNs. The law bans: > provid[ing] supportive services to a prediction market or consumer knowing that the services will be used to identify a consumer’s location, transfer money, or make or process payments for the purpose of allowing consumers to make wagers or to settle wagers made by consumers in violation of this section. "knowing" is key here.

sergiotapia 5mo ago

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.

kube-system 5mo ago
I've seen a lot of YouTube ads recently for illegal gambling apps
nozzlegear 5mo ago
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 they'll win or lose Twitch chat points alongside him.
- ziml77 5mo ago
  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.

mghackerlady 5mo ago

Love it here, only sane state there is these days. Everywhere else is either brain dead, too hot, or too mean

rebekkamikkoa 5mo ago

It’s hard to pretend this isn’t at least gambling-adjacent when most people are simply betting on outcomes.

elictronic 5mo ago
It’s easy to pretend, just really hard to convince anyone without a direct financial interest.
jeltz 5mo ago
Given that exactly the same thing has been regulated as gambling in Europe under the name "betting exchange" for 25 years the case for it being gambling is quite strong.
anon291 5mo ago
It's gambling sure and gambling should generally be legal. People are bizarrely puritanical about this.

CPLX 5mo ago

They've been banned for generations. It's called gambling. Of course, we all have to sit through another round of Silicon Valley pretending they've discovered some new exciting business model that's just vice. Unlicensed gypsy cabs, SROs, shift work, patent medicines, narcotics dealing, customs fraud, and smuggling already had established market entrants I guess.

chairmansteve 5mo ago
You left out ponzi schemes, aka crypto.
anon291 5mo ago
Gambling works and is normal in most of the world. No idea why the USA is puritanical about this. It's like the oldest business on the planet.
- kenferry 5mo ago
  Er, I agree it's incredibly old, but also has been treated as societal ill and subject to regulation for its entire history.
  - Gagarin1917 5mo ago
    Wanting to control the non-violent actions of others is also a social ill. Just one most haven’t woken up to yet.
  - meta_gunslinger 5mo ago
    Should cannabis and other currently illegal substances remain as such?
    - kenferry 5mo ago
      I mean, I don't think we should legalize Fentanyl.
    - ziml77 5mo ago

Imnimo 5mo ago

I could imagine cases where prediction markets could offer some actual insight, but in practice they seem few and far between. Most markets I've seen devolve into one or more of: betting on unimportant events (e.g. sports games), insider trading, or poorly written ambiguous resolution criteria. It's just hard for me to imagine that, on net, these markets will offer more societal good than the harm we've seen from sports betting.

throwaway613746 5mo ago
[dead]
LewisVerstappen 5mo ago
Insider trading does offer actual insight
bobbylarrybobby 5mo ago
Getting inside traders to publicize their knowledge for a price is like half of the point of prediction markets
- DanielVZ 5mo ago
  Does polymarket then have a full profile of its users to be able to distinguish insider trades vs noise? Genuine question as I haven’t used the site and everything I know about them are comments and some articles.
- Silamoth 5mo ago
  I asked this elsewhere, but do you have an example of this knowledge? Have prediction markets ever revealed genuine knowledge? If so, has anyone ever acted on the newly revealed knowledge in a meaningful way?
autoexec 5mo ago
> I could imagine cases where prediction markets could offer some actual insight I could imagine that there's very little insight to be gained when some 23 year old has so little hope for his financial future that he's spending some of what he earned last night delivering food for uber eats on making a completely uninformed bet on a geopolitical situation involving a country he couldn't even find on a map just in case it pays out well enough that he can afford some of the needed medical care he's been putting off. That's the type of user I imagine most people participating in prediction markets are. It's telling that the vast majority of the people making bets lose their money. Are their predictions really valuable data?

Robotbeat 5mo ago

Does this ban the prediction markets that don’t use real money but instead tokens that are worthless?

antiframe 5mo ago
If the tokens are worthless, where's the thrill in the gambling?
- Robotbeat 5mo ago
  Just for love of the game.
  - antiframe 5mo ago
    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.

yamillove 5mo ago

It would be good if they banned Learing Centers.

behringer 5mo ago
They do ban fraudulant learning centers...

kklisura 5mo ago

Cue in the talking heads to tell us how devastating this ban is.

kyledrake 5mo ago

They're not going to get rid of them, they're just going to drive them underground, which will make them impossible to regulate, which will make using them less safe. I don't participate in prediction markets, but I would bet everything I own on this outcome.

wizzwizz4 5mo ago
Making using them less safe means that certain kinds of better are less likely to use them, which may be a purpose of this legislation.
- tyg13 5mo ago
  Exactly. I see this common idea trotted out that "where there's a will, there's a way" -- if the government bans something, the ban will never be effective, because people still want that thing, and so a ban will just encourage violating the law. But that's highly contingent on that thing being something people are willing to violate the law over, and on the convenience of that thing not being significantly impacted by prohibition. Neither of which are true for prediction betting (it's almost identical to sports betting in that regard, imo.) The only reason these markets proliferate is precisely because they are legal.
- peferron 5mo ago
  Especially if there's also a ban on related advertising. Polymarket and others are absolutely flooding the world with ads at the moment.
tempaccountabcd 5mo ago
[dead]
kube-system 5mo ago
That's already what it is. They are an underground gambling site pretending that they're not doing things that they literally do by calling it something else. They're like a drug dealer who thinks they're slick by calling their drugs "research chemicals".

jongjong 5mo ago

They should ban the stock market as well then since the stock market is essentially just a prediction market.

behringer 5mo ago
That would be awesome.

michaefe 5mo ago

While it's obviously sports betting, the fact is that federal law gives the CFTC the power to determine what is and isn't a future and expressly preempts state intervention in futures markets. And, the case as to why futures markets generally should be subject only to federal oversight is quite strong IMO. So, the case can quickly become whether or not the CFTC should consider sports betting to be a future, and judges typically defer to the executive branch when it's not obvious (and in this case I don't think it is, the bar owner in Philly hedging an Eagles loss is an entirely plausible, albeit unlikely and uncommon, situation). While I am partial to the argument that the CFTC is actually taking away the states' 10th Amendment police power right, that is a somewhat tenuous case in comparison to the enumerated right of the federal government to provide sole jurisdiction to the executive branch to enforce a law (and not to mention a law that impacts interstate commerce). I imagine Minnesota loses this case and what's far more likely is either a more liberal congress changes what is a future by law or a more liberal executive branch reduces the protections for Kalshi et al.

yieldcrv 5mo ago
90% agree, the CFTC doesn't consider these futures contracts, it regulates them under its "contract market" authority, that Congress designated and updated periodically over time This is the authority on the CFTC's own website on prediction markets "For more information" section https://www.cftc.gov/LearnandProtect/PredictionMarkets https://www.cftc.gov/LearnandProtect/PredictionMarkets https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?hl=false&edition=prelim&path=&req=granuleid%3AUSC-prelim-title7-section7&fq=&num=0&saved=%7CZ3JhbnVsZWlkOlVTQy1wcmVsaW0tdGl0bGU3LXNlY3Rpb243%7C%7C%7C0%7Cfalse%7Cprelim https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?hl=false&edition=prelim&... And yes, both the Supremacy clause and the Interstate commerce clause neutralize any 10th amendment claim, unless the Federal government or any of its agencies was completely mum on the activity. But since the Federal government has exerted authority over that industry, via the interstate commerce clause, states can pound sand.
- michaefe 5mo ago
  Oh interesting, I didn't know that about the contract market authority.

jmyeet 5mo ago

Remember in the late 2010s when the hack Ajit Pai, then fCC Chair, said that the FCC couldn't or shouldn't enforce Obama-era Title 8 net neutrality? Remember how states like California then said "OK, it's not a federal issue so we'll do it at the state level"? Then remember how the DoJ, at the FCC's direction, sued California [1]? Well, which is it? Was net neutrality a state or federal issue? The answer is it's, as always, a Schrodinger's STate's rights issue. That is, it's a "state's rights" issue when it suits them, a federal issue when it suits them and it's neither when it suits them. Lack of any kind of regulation is the goal. This isn't some libertarian pipe dream. It's just naked pro-company and pro-billionaire gutting of government to boost profits. Fast forward to prediction markets. The CFTC regulates this (arguably). Another deregulation hack is in charge. And again, states like Minnesota who already ban sports betting are being sued. "State's rights" btw. We're seeing the exact same pattern. This on the same day that the president who sued the IRS, which was defended by the president's DoJ and the recess appointee Attorney-General settled a $10 billion lawsuit right as a federal judge tosses it because the case lacked adversity [2]. Besides the J6 slush fund, part of this settlement is that the IRS is barred from ever investigating Trump, his family or the Trump Organization for tax fraud. The level of corruption and kleptocracy here is beyond belief and what's really frightening is that a good 35-40% of the population not only don't care but actively support something they will never benefit from and there hasn't been (and won't be) any political price paid for any of it. The president's endorsement still carries weight and just today, we've had the most expensive Congressional primary in history (~$35 million) where Trump unseated a sitting Congressmen for daring to push for releasing the Epstein files. [1]: https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-files-net-neutrality-lawsuit-against-state-california-0 https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-f... [2]: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/insight/trump-eyes-1-776b-irs-settlement-fund-amid-backlash/gm-GM44E85EB1?gemSnapshotKey=GM44E85EB1-snapshot-15 https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/insight/trump-eyes-1-776b-irs... [3]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2026/05/19/blanche-faces-capitol-hill-grilling-18b-anti-weaponization-fund/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2026/05/19/...

HoldOnAMinute 5mo ago

What a waste of time and energy

meta_gunslinger 5mo ago
Agreed, instead of focusing on the rampant fraud happening under their watch they are focusing on consensual behaviour between adults.
- behringer 5mo ago
  There's rampant fraud on the "prediction markets".
  - HoldOnAMinute 5mo ago
    How does it hurt anyone? Whatever happened to "personal responsibility"? It'e entertainment. Don't participate if you don't want to.
    - behringer 5mo ago
      it's personal responsibility to get taken by a business? I don't think so.

seliopou 5mo ago

The CFTC commission comprises five seats, four of which are currently vacant: https://www.cftc.gov/About/Commissioners/index.htm https://www.cftc.gov/About/Commissioners/index.htm

Zopieux 5mo ago

Congrats Minnesota and good luck with enforcement.

socalgal2 5mo ago

What did the prediction markets predict for this? Theoretically, if they're good at predicting then they should have predicted they'd be banned

throwawa1 5mo ago

This is great news. From my perspective from someone who grew up in the 90s, America feels like we took the turn towards Biff Tannen's Pleasure Paradise. A future very fa from our promise filled with gambling, social degradation, and worse economic prospects for everyone. Gambling sites like Polymarket are just a symptom. More states need to move in this direction, because its just a tax levied on the uninformed to insider cashing in

matttproud 5mo ago
Good on Minnesota.
- UberFly 5mo ago
  Not even. Minnesota is fine with betting as long as it is tribal betting and lawmakers are getting their share of the cut. Look it up.
  - matttproud 5mo ago
    I lived there, and I am familiar with that. I would be happy if they did away with all of it, including the state-administered lottery. But this is a great start of low-hanging fruit.
    - deflator 5mo ago
      Once a vice is taxed, it becomes a budget line item for the local government and is much harder to get rid of
  - bequanna 5mo ago
    Exactly. This is not a law to protect people, this is a law to protect entrenched special interests (Reservation and State-owned casinos).
baggachipz 5mo ago
And Biff is the president D:

jimmygrapes 5mo ago

They're only doing this because they know Brock "Legnar" is gonna win at Summerslam /s but not /s iykyk

abustamam 5mo ago

tty456 5mo ago
Does it actually ban VPNs? or just ban VPNs from being used to access prediction markets?
mnahkies 5mo ago
Yeah that seems like a massive reach. Does banking count as a "supporting service"? After all a prediction market isn't very useful if you can't get money in/out.
- abustamam 5mo ago
  I think "supporting services" is in reference to ways to disguise the location, which is why they used VPN as an example. I don't know how they will enforce it but the fact that they want to control it is concerning.
Broken_Hippo 5mo ago
If you don't actually sell someone something illegal, but take them to buy illegal things using the safety of your car so they avoid detection - are you innocent? Drinking and driving exists and is illegal, but going to the grocery store isn't. Should we do an all or nothing sort of ban, either allowing drunk driving or banning cars altogether? No one would do this - some uses are illegal, most aren't. A law that allows legal uses of your car but disallows illegal activity isn't all that unheard of.
- chadgpt3 5mo ago
  If you are a taxi company and a bank robber takes a taxi to the bank, are you innocent?

joelthelion 5mo ago

I hope play money prediction markets are untouched. They are useful and fun, and as far as I know, dont have the downsides of real prediction markets.

3vo-ai 5mo ago

[dead]

gigatexal 5mo ago

Maybe the states will save us when the Federal government finally succumbs to the cancer that is Trump.

iamkrazy 5mo ago

[flagged]

meta_gunslinger 5mo ago
No, the scammers running those are voting for them.

steveBK123 5mo ago

I think in 10 years we'll see the rise of online sports betting, including in prediction markets form, as a new opioids epidemic. For some amount of people they use it recreationally to blow off some steam, but theres a segment of the population that ruins their lives on it. In some sense it may be worse than opioids because a husband (its always the guy) can ruin their families finances in secret before the wife's credit card gets declines & she pulls on the threads to find six figures of hidden debt from it and realize they are about to lose their home. In some ways, historically having gambling located in specific geographic areas that were not within most peoples daily travel routine ensured safer use.

theiz 5mo ago

One of the biggest commodity trading companies is in Minnesota (Cargill), where I would think that commodities are a prediction market too: They predict the harvest and relate that to a future price. Also there are quite some real estate investors in Minnesota, also due to tax arrangements. Wonder how that will pan out.

edge_trader_41 5mo ago

[dead]