[cj]

I finally gave in to my curiosity and downloaded Kalshi last week to place a few bets on the World Cup.

I was blown away how easy it was. I placed a bet with real money within 5 minutes of downloading the app.

They allow instant deposits with credit card, and ID verification was real time.

I can’t imagine that the extreme accessibility and the typical dark patterns deployed by every popular app won’t eventually end badly.

(I was also shocked that when looking at my credit card bill online, next to the Kalshi deposit line item it showed a promo “would you like to split this payment over 12 month?” and seemingly was only available for that one transaction. So I could have deposited $1000 via CC into Kalshi and paid it back $83/mo over 12 months.)

This industry is wild.

[Lio]

> It Ain’t What You Don’t Know That Gets You Into Trouble. It’s What You Know for Sure That Just Ain’t So.

My worry is that social media surveillance could be combined with Polymarket to tailor bets to individuals.

This could be very subtle. You don't really need your punters to always be wrong either. Meaning that sometimes they'd win at the expense of other punters with the illusion they can make money.

You just need them to be wrong, say, 15% of the time and to keep coming back compulsively and consistently over time. The longer the better.

If you're ever around fruit/slot machines you'll notice that they do payout and when they do they make a lot of noise. That hides the fact they slowly cream off a percentage of the money that goes in. In the UK the legal limit is around 30%, keeping it low for new gamblers and ramping up when they're hooked.

With detailed information about punter's lives and no regulation you can weaponise that.

[gertrunde]

With "AWP" (Amusement with Prize, as opposed to SWP: Skill with Prize, i.e. quiz machines), they're often set to payout 80-85% of money taken in. (SWP's are usually around 30%).

And at that level they're still pocketing hundreds of pounds per week per machine.

The most lucrative ones I've seen (admittedly ~20 years ago now) were being emptied by the operator twice a week and taking out £600-800 every time, per machine, with 3-4 machines per location.

An eye opening industry - I'm sure there are businesses out there that pretend to be one thing (pub, club, etc), but their primary profit source is gambling.

[mschuster91]

> An eye opening industry - I'm sure there are businesses out there that pretend to be one thing (pub, club, etc), but their primary profit source is gambling.

Having worked in such a "business" - the problem is rents. When everyone else around you has a slot machine or two, landlords raise the rents (because they see what their neighbor landlord can get away with). And now, you as a legitimate pub owner have to choose, do you raise the beer prices yet again, or do you put up a slot machine yourself?

And sooner or later, depending on the greediness of the landlord, you have to choose between putting up a slot machine or closing down outright.

Gambling is an incredibly corrosive force. Not just to the gamblers themselves (wtf, I heard there are triple-zero roulette tables in Vegas these days?), but also to everyone and everything surrounding it.

I agree, some level of allowing gambling makes sense, gambling can even be observed in the animal kingdom, but it absolutely needs to be regulated.

[actionfromafar]

Future of AI Fintech

[infinite_spin]

There's a lot of proposed legislation trying to expand mobile gambling too:

https://www.gamblinginsider.com/news/114277/massachusetts-ig...

https://sportsbettingalliance.org/take-action/ohio_igaming/

https://sportsbettingalliance.org/take-action/texas/

https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Details/h...

[mastermage]

WHAT and I have to stress IN THE ACTUAL FUCK

[cucumber3732842]

You see sins. Politicians see sin taxes, political will to spin up regulatory beurocracies, etc, etc.

[taurath]

We used to debate things like the harms to society of gambling, now it’s a silent decree that it’s not only legal but the basis for our economy. The same group who used to preach family values turned out to be the biggest casino pimps and pornographers.

[soulofmischief]

Meanwhile, small poker groups and gambling dens patronized by consenting adults routinely get busted.

[cucumber3732842]

"As they ought to, how dare they not give the system a cut"

-you know exactly the type I'm mocking

[kakacik]

You know what earns a lot of money rather effortlessly? Harvesting organs. I mean its just a cash flow, anyway for sure from sinners. Look at Chinese, always ahead of the curve.

Bonus points for saving lives of some wealthy folks. Everybody (who matters) wins.

I have some other ideas, all one needs is to flush morals down the drain for good. Clearly some folks are there already, we need to quickly jump on that rat race or FOMO would catch up and thats a big NONO.

[infinite_spin]

> According to Miller, who is no longer with KODA, TJ's declaring physician believed he showed too many signs of life _to continue with the surgery_, but KODA wanted to proceed anyway. https://www.kxlh.com/health/kentucky-man-wakes-during-organ-...

[trumpdong]

If gambling stops, the economy collapses.

[paulryanrogers]

Do you mean casinos and betting apps? The stock market? Something else?

[scns]

Preachers are often hypocrites.

[danaris]

> You see sins.

I can't speak for mastermage, but I don't see sins.

I see addictions, and vultures preying on them and actively profiting from exploiting their self-destruction.

[infinite_spin]

They actively encourage addicts to "self-exclude" themselves from winnings, meaning if they go to a casino and win, the casino will bar them from collecting those winnings.. but they don't appear to stop that same person from placing bets in the first place.

https://massgaming.com/about/voluntary-self-exclusion/

[mastermage]

you can speak for me in this case because this is predatory as fuck. And instead of protecting the vulnerable they profiteer of of it.

[brookst]

Politicians DGAF about sin taxes or creating bureaucracies that tbey have no control over.

But the lobbyist money, the campaign donations? Those are the drivers.

[walrus01]

> They allow instant deposits with credit card

This is my biggest takeaway, and I really wonder what payment processor(s) they're using, because the chargeback and fraud rate in filling 'real money' into an online gambling account using visa or mastercard must be through the roof.

Exactly same reason why porn sites use their own specialist payment processors (alluded to in popular fiction in Industry season 4 recently, for instance).

The back end of how they're able to get money "instantly" into peoples accounts must be fascinating, in a how the sausages are made kind of way.

[flexagoon]

> Exactly same reason why porn sites use their own specialist payment processors

They're called high-risk payment processors and they usually handle all sorts of "legal but sketchy" sectors like porn, gambling, crypto, legalized drugs/vapes, MLMs, etc. It's not even some shadowy darknet industry, if you just search for "high risk payment processor" there is plenty of them which look very professional and even provide official Shopify integrations and stuff.

Interesting that if you go to one of their websites they also handle some pretty normal industries like "furniture" or "travel" just because of the high chargeback rate in them.

[fc417fc802]

I wonder what the chargeback and fraud rate actually is in practice given they do ID verification. Pretty difficult to claim you didn't make the purchase depending on what they collect.

[lxgr]

Having verified somebody's government ID doesn't actually factor into chargeback decisions and outcomes, not least because many forms of online KYC practiced today in the US are pretty laughable from a security point of view.

[walrus01]

True, but for merchants that ship high fraud risk physical merchandise, it's becoming increasingly common to ask for a copy of a drivers license or other government issued photo ID (from a recognized US state or Canadian province, in the North American market) before a product gets shipped. I've seen this from a number of persons adjacent to a completely different forum who frequently buy things online like rifle scopes, spotting scopes, rangefinders, camera lenses, etc.

Getting a copy of the ID, only shipping to card billing address, using a signature on delivery required shipping option considerably cuts down on the number of fraudulent orders.

[fragmede]

because no one's ever had their wallet/purse with their ID in it stolen?

[brookst]

What percent of ID verifications do you think are from stolen wallets / purses?

[mothballed]

Once information stolen its easy to produce a digital fake ID with the info thats sold on the dark web and used everywhere. Private KYC collecting merchants rarely have the ability to authenticate the full gamet of valid types of government IDs.

[lxgr]

Contrary to incredibly popular belief (at least in the US), asking for a photo of somebody's ID is actually not a sane way to do KYC. The point of an identity document is to check its security elements in person and compare the photo to the person standing in front of you. (Part of this can be replicated by doing a live video call, but that window is quickly closing due to deepfakes.)

Yet countless times in the past years, US and a few other companies have asked me to "identify myself" by sending them a scan of my goverment ID via chat/email/web form attachment, with absolutely no liveness check. This is just insane.

[fragmede]

what percentage of fraud is fraud? I honestly don't know!

[jappgar]

I'm assuming they pay high percentages to processors on deposits to cover the losses.

Then they recoup that (and more) in withdrawal fees

[cj]

Plus a 2% fee charged on deposit.

[manwithopinions]

The U.S. is quite far behind the rest of the world on sports betting, which means you don’t even need to imagine, we know from other countries that it doesn’t end well. The most worrying aspect is, the current U.S. government has no interest in the regulations that have helped minimise the problems in other countries.

The U.K’s highest earner for a few years running was the founder of a U.K. betting site, she had something like a 500 million salary and there is an entire town’s economy supported by her business.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bet365

[m00dy]

I personally never met her but Bet365 is one of the most protected sites on the internet when it comes to antibot protections. When I started my company in 2025, I had two customers from UK, they were very much interested in odds for horse races from bet365, mostly realtime. Bet365 knew I was coming for them.

[short_sells_poo]

It's really telling about the state of the UK economy that the highest earner's business doesn't make anything but literally drains money from the masses.

[cjrp]

> Her salary of £421 million in 2020 was 50% higher than it was in 2019, and higher than all FTSE 100 Index CEOs combined.

[zipy124]

Whilst it is technically a salary, since the business is wholly owned by her and her family it is effectively a dividend, so it isn't quite accurate to compare it to CEO's of non-wholly owned private or public companies. Other CEO's might have gotten paid more since they might own enough stocks in the company to receive dividends, or share awards etc...

[cjrp]

That's a fair point, it would be more interesting to compare the salary to equivalent, family-owned private companies (although I'm sure most of them don't disclose that sort of thing).

[rightbyte]

Well try to make a withdrawal and see how convinient that might be. Internet casinos are usually easy to get money into but hard to get money out of.

[Lucasoato]

If everything goes as planned, you won’t have to get anything out.

[blitzar]

... anddddd its gone

[dehrmann]

I haven't used Kalshi, but I expected it's actually easy because it's technically a futures exchange, so it'll be regulated more like a stock brokerage than off-shore gambling.

[kortilla]

It works just fine. It’s not a casino in the regular sense because you’re betting against other people, not the house.

[LiamPowell]

I'm not sure about Kalshi, however on most sports betting sites you actually are betting against the house. The betting sites all have in-house models (or piggyback off other sites) that are much better at predicting odds than the general public. If someone is making money then the sites just place limits on that account so they're not losing money.

[raverbashing]

It's not too complicated

The average player loses money. Hence the opposite side will make money

Exceptions are dealt accordingly

[toxik]

It comes down to some form of the old adage "the average person thinks they're smarter than the average person". They're not.

[nairboon]

In a casino you can bet against other people too. Nonetheless, the house always wins and takes its cut.

[expedition32]

With gambling you should always play for entertainment. If you play to win you've already lost.

[TeMPOraL]

Making paper airplanes from dollar bills, and setting their backs on fire to give them jet engines, is likely cheaper and more entertaining, so if you're gambling anyway, you've already lost, period.

[jfengel]

Cheaper, yes. More entertaining, not for a lot of people. Many play the same way you'd play a video game, with the actual stakes giving it a bigger rush. Enough that some become addicted.

If it weren't fun it wouldn't be nearly as big a problem.

[yehoshuapw]

and perhaps somewhat safer

[nairboon]

But if you don't win, where's the fun in that? Do you consider other ways to part with your money also as entertainment? Is donating entertaining?

[hilariously]

There's an old phrase that says something like "Look around the table, if you cant see the mark you're it." - if you think you are not betting against the house on a gambling site, you're VERY it.

[tills13]

Instant deposit via credit card? Is that not considered a cash advance?

[LPisGood]

It is, and I know someone who found that out the hard way during the Super Bowl.

[herpderperator]

A cash advance is taking physical cash out with your credit card at an ATM or bank teller. Making an online purchase (which depositing money into your Kalshi account is) is therefore not a cash advance.

[Arainach]

There are many kinds of "cash advance". You can't buy lottery tickets on a credit card (or in jurisdictions where you can, it's a cash advance). Credit cards also treat things such as buying dollar coins online from the US Mint different from a normal transaction.

https://gosunward.org/articles/cash-advance-on-a-credit-card...

[notpushkin]

There is a whole lot of merchant categories that is treated like withdrawing money from an ATM. I believe the term is “quasicash”.

[hhh]

I saw this for the first time in NYC at a dispensary, i’ve never seen a payment terminal charge me $4.75 for an atm transaction fee but it was pretty smooth.

[no-name-here]

“Cash equivalents” is the term.

[herpderperator]

Prediction market aren't one of them. I checked my credit card statement and the transaction was classified as Professional Services.

[jamesfinlayson]

In Australia any sort of gambling payment on a credit card is treated as a cash advance. If you use PayPal on top of your credit card, the credit card company still manages to introspect it and apply a cash advance fee.

[YeahThisIsMe]

But these are "prediction markets", an entirely different thing that is definitely not gambling!

[Yizahi]

But if you somehow have a 100% correct prediction you are now "insider trading" and that is not allowed because all gambling.. ahem, all betting... hmm... All predicting much be "fair" and "random" and definitely not too good.

[ben_w]

So they want you to believe, but I find I cannot take such claims seriously.

[herpderperator]

I really appreciate all of the colourful feedback, but as I have said, this is not a cash advance. It was classified as Professional Services by Capital One and I received 1.5% cash back as is standard with the credit card I used.

The issue stems from the fact that people believe prediction markets are gambling. Prediction markets are financial derivatives regulated by the CFTC. This definition is not something I am trying to defend, I am simply accepting the current legal definition to explain why funding your Kalshi account is not considered a cash advance. Gambling is not even allowed in my state, yet Kalshi is permitted. Legally, Kalshi is not gambling as of the current legislation. That is why, for the nth time, funding your Kalshi account is NOT considered a cash advance.

People should do a little bit of research before blindly downvoting, or maybe even try it for themselves.

[brador]

It’s a cash advance since you’re not purchasing goods or services with the card.

[lxgr]

It’s really a cash advance whenever the issuing bank decides it is. There is no official definition.

[herpderperator]

It's not a cash advance. I funded my Kalshi account using a Capital One credit card. Not only was it not classified a cash advance, I got 1.5% back as is standard on this card.

[weird-eye-issue]

Not necessarily, I mean if you buy a in-game item or currency that wouldn't be a cash advance so with this they could just say you bought $20 worth of credits and since you're buying credits that could be considered a good.

[brador]

That would be purchasing a license (service).

Gambling is always classed as a cash advance. The gift cards trick has been tapped and closed, the credit companies figured it out decades ago.

[avn2109]

Key point though is that Kalshi and similar prediction market betting apps are parimutuel, unlike traditional sportsbooks/Draftkings etc where punters bet against the house. This greatly changes (improves) the incentives for the house, e.g. they don't ban sharks and search only for dumb money punters, they try much less to prevent you from leaving with your winnings etc. The parimutuel house just takes a flat rake percentage off the top of the sum of all bids, so they just want to maximize the amount of money wagered overall instead of doing shady shenanigans.

I'm not a prediction market user/booster nor a sports gambler, but this is a key difference and a strict improvement from traditional sportsbook apps. If our society is going to have widespread legal gambling, we strongly want it to be parimutuel.

[embedding-shape]

This was my experience trying out "traditional betting" for the first time with Betfair last Worldcup, and some other platform I tried out before as well. Not sure what Kalshi/others are doing that is so different?

[watwut]

They pretend they are "market" and not gambling to avoid regulations.

[Ferret7446]

It is not pretend, it is technically correct (the best kind of correct). Redefining what gambling is, is a different problem.

[Yizahi]

If it's a "market" then why do they enforce "fair bets" and disallow actually participating in a market to prevent influence on the totally-not-gambling-bets? If it's a market I can go play there and maybe even win it completely if I'm that good. So can I go to Poly, make a bet on a market state and then go change that market to satisfy my bet, aka "predict" it successfully? No? Why? Oh, because it's not actually predicting, it's gambling, and fixing gambles is a bad sport. Poly and Kalshi are biggest hypocrites ever.

[A_D_E_P_T]

It's a market in the same way that poker and blackjack are "markets" on which cards are most likely to appear. You don't need to redefine what gambling is.

[watwut]

It is not technically correct. It is just manipulative. It is gambling in its pure sense and meaning.

[skywhopper]

Markets sell actual products. These are gambling apps.

[maxbond]

If you're going to gamble, it's probably for the best that your counterparty doesn't also control the platform. I'm not saying that justifies being able to gamble frictionlessly, but it is marginally less exploitative. Eg, back in the day bucket shops (which sold binary options, like prediction markets do) would increase the spread in proportion to their assessment of your skill such that you would lose even if you were more skilled. In a proper market the platform makes the same amount of money whoever wins.

So, not all that different, but marginally less exploitative. I've never looked at Polymarket but Kalshi and PredictIt slid steadily from things of at least plausible real economic value (a market where it was conceivable [if unlikely] someone would be hedging their insurance contract or something) into total nonsense with no non-gambling function like whether someone would tweet a certain word.

I think prediction markets could serve a similar to a futures markets and have a functional purpose in the economy. It could be useful to generate real time estimates of the probability of some events that no one can control and have real economic consequences, like a hurricane. But evidently that's not where the money is.

[A_D_E_P_T]

> I think prediction markets could serve a similar to a futures markets and have a functional purpose in the economy. It could be useful to generate real time estimates of the probability of some events that no one can control and have real economic consequences, like a hurricane.

Even though nobody can control them, some people can predict them better than others. (Meteorologists with good models and supercomputers, etc.) In general it's impossible to prevent the appearance of insider trading in prediction markets, and it's also impossible -- unless you massively restrict what people can bet on -- to prevent people from doing things for bets to resolve in their favor, which turns those "markets" into "bounties." (The same guys who theorized prediction markets were the ones who theorized assassination markets.)

They're fundamentally broken and the fact that they're allowed is a sign and symptom of a dysfunctional society.

[maxbond]

Insider trading by, say, having direct access to the particular wind vane that grounds the market and being able to manipulate it is a problem. Being better at trading because you have better models or better computers isn't per se a problem. Any more than it's a problem if someone is a better poker player.

In a broader context this may contribute to income inequality and regulatory capture, it can have negative externalities. But it isn't on it's face a problem. And the alleged positive externalities (realtime forecasts and a liquid market for hedging) are driven by such skilled traders.

Not all prediction markets are equally easy to manipulate. The bar was supposed to be (according to my hazy recollection) that a market had to be run in collaboration with an outside authority who, along with delivering a verdict that was already part of their normal duties, would help you exclude insiders from the market. That's a defensible position (not morally, tactically).

But "will so and so tweet about such and such" is a total joke. That's indefensible. That I do think that should never have been allowed or should be regulated as gambling. If there's no conceivable natural hedger, it isn't a real financial market and doesn't have a function (or the function is gambling, whichever).

Don't get me wrong, I think this turned into an end run around gambling regulations (that's certainly what happened with PredictIt), but I don't think that was always inevitable or will necessarily always be the case. That's a strong attractor for sure but it was pushed that way by the COVID era meme stock frenzy, the deregulation of online gambling, and ultimately competitive pressure from the sketchier markets. Once those forces were aligned it was inevitable, but it's possible that in 10 years there will have been a crackdown and tightening down of regulation and things will be very different. I'm not that optimistic, but it's a real possibility.

[trumpdong]

Coinbase CEO said all the words on Polymarket at end of Q3 earnings call: https://www.tradingview.com/news/cointelegraph:2eb9f98ac094b...

[TeMPOraL]

> They're fundamentally broken and the fact that they're allowed is a sign and symptom of a dysfunctional society.

There are two ways to view a market (prediction or stock): as socially accepted gambling for posh elites (and now every wannabe rich), and as a prediction engine that refines people's opinions, beliefs and information into a most accurate estimate possible.

If you take the first view, insider trading is dysfunctional and unfair. If you take the second view, insider trading is the entire point, it's how you get strong signal into the system.

Prediction markets were conceptualized by people taking the second view.

[maxbond]

You won't incorporate information from outsiders if they think they're going to get ripped off by insiders.

[TeMPOraL]

That's system working as intended. If there exist insiders with valuable information, engaging outsiders will just add noise to the signal.

(It's why I wrote about two perspectives - preferring outsiders to insiders only makes sense if the goal is to create a gambling venue.)

[skywhopper]

Why would prediction markets do a better job of predicting hurricanes than, say, meteorologists, weather stations, and satellite information?

All evidence I’ve seen shows mainstream prediction markets devolve quickly into gambling and related corruption while predicting nothing other than conventional wisdom. especially about real-time facts. The prediction markets on the NBA Finals game four this year were completely useless.

[maxbond]

"Better" depends on the application but more precisely it would be "real time" and may include things that are measured but rarely if ever published. A prediction market doing poorly might be a negative result, "this is a martingale and our ability to forecast is limited." That would be my suspicion for a sports event but it could also mean that the participants are gamblers and so not making useful predictions, entirely possible.

The other value proposition would be that you could hedge your risk against all sorts of things that would otherwise be very difficult, like someone who sells funnel cakes hedging the risk of poor at the state fair due to rain. I think that's potentially interesting but was always far fetched and is definitely not as common as gambling.

[embedding-shape]

> it's probably for the best that your counterparty doesn't also control the platform

But doesn't Polymarket et al own their own platforms, just like Betfair owns their platform? There is no P2P going on, even if some markets seem to advertise themselves as such so again, seems like the same just minus gambling regulations?

[maxbond]

As far as I know it is "P2P", a continuous double sided auction like any proper exchange. If there's something fishy going on with the order book I do not personally know about it. (I don't think there is but I'm also not going to stick my neck out for them.)

https://docs.polymarket.com/concepts/prices-orderbook

https://help.kalshi.com/en/articles/13823828-the-orderbook

Tl;Dr there's an order book with prices set by supply and demand. So you're at the whims of the market rather than the whims of someone who is your broker, exchange, clearinghouse, and taking the other side of your trade. I don't know much about Polymarket but iirc Kalshi is only your broker and exchange, so dealing with them is materially less risky in my mind.

[watwut]

Futures role is not "generate real time estimates of the probability" and never was. They have two roles: actual contracts to deliver later at set price and high risk trading (yes, some peoples use of it is gambling). Futures markets at do in fact have the actual market component. Prediction markets don't.

If you want meteorological prediction, you are way better off buying meteorological prediction from a company that sells meteorological predictions.

[maxbond]

I said similar, not identical. The primary role of a futures market is for consumers and producers of commodities to hedge out their risk so that they don't go bankrupt if there's volatility in the market. Speculators (by which I do not mean gamblers) make money in futures markets by acting like insurance companies and absorbing that risk. Hedgers take "losing" trades that are equivalent to paying an insurance premium.

Prediction markets could be interesting to hedge a bunch of weird little things. Alas, not how things have gone so far really.

[skywhopper]

They pretend they are not a gambling operation to get around geographical and age restrictions limiting gambling.

[owlninja]

I read a book this year about sports gambling in the US [1], and it points out how nasty and predatory it is. I think "prediction markets" have even less regulation? I would talk to my sports fan buddies at work and they would say "oh, just how sportsbooks in Vegas operate already", but this is on-demand, in your face, constantly nudging you to bet with dark patterns and "comps". I used to want sports gambling legal in the US, but the way it has gone is incredibly disgusting and is starting to make watching sports almost annoying. The crawl on the bottom is no longer scores, but moneylines...

[1] "Everybody Loses: The Tumultuous Rise of American Sports Gambling" (2026) by Danny Funt

[mullingitover]

It only really struck me in adulthood: the professional sports, particularly baseball and American football, are basically gambling delivery vehicles. They’re packed with nonstop betting opportunities for the duration of the events. Football games ceremonially start off with a coin toss, which is very much on the nose. The ‘fun game’ aspect of the sports are very difficult to find among all the bettable events.

[somenameforme]

A bit of a tangent, but many like the moneylines isn't because of gambling but because it tells you who's the favorite/underdog and by what margin. It's like in the equivalent of a chess game of knowing the player's ratings, which itself can directly lead to a nominal moneyline, but in most sports there's no formal predictive rating system.

[tbossanova]

It’s the kind of thing that would suck all enjoyment out of watching sports for me personally. I may well be in a minority though, possibly an old person thing too

[somenameforme]

Fellow old here too. I enjoy it because there's a lot of sports I follow intermittently. For instance I enjoy watching UFC on occasion, but often find by the time I catch another fight I often have no clue who the guys in the main event are!

I think I enjoy the odds because it adds a sort of unspoken storyline to a fight, because those fighters themselves also know who's the underdog and it adds a bit of a psychological edge to the contest.

It's a lot like watching a chess game where the same stuff unfolds where you expect the favorite to push. Will the underdog look to survive, try to come and prove he's not to be taken lightly, and so on. Good times.

[rubzah]

I feel the same way, the odds are part of the story. The UFC has removed them now, I guess as part of the Paramount deal. This actually makes the events less interesting.

By the way, the UFC chews through athletes so fast (part of their somewhat exploitative business model), it's no wonder it's hard to keep up with the latest names.

[vintermann]

There could easily be. There's no reason you couldn't publish some Elo-like thing on teams or players, if that was your interest - you don't need gambling to get a good idea of who the favorite is. But the interest is in gambling, so most people inclined to publish such a thing probably bet themselves/sell it as a product to gamblers.

[somenameforme]

But this is where stuff like prediction markets shine. In chess, for instance, the prediction market odds are going to be way closer to the outcome than might be expected because of the players' ratings. This is because skilled bettors are capable of considering things like exact matchups, history, short-term performance/form, and many other factors that a static rating can't really account for.

Incidentally this is also what makes chess games relatively profitable. Moderate-info bettors will do things like flip on their chess engine, look at the eval, and then bet on that. But a computer might say a position is a dead-draw when a stronger player can tell you 'white has big practical winning chances'.

[vintermann]

You can build a model accounting for all the things you like, you don't have to limit yourself to Elo (its main selling point is that it's easy enough that players can easily calculate how many rating points they stand to lose/gain) or Glicko (almost as easy).

Even in the most optimistic case, betting market accuracy will be limited by the commission (if you have a better estimate than the market, but not sufficiently better that you'll make money on it, you don't bet), and I think even a not-terribly-smart model can get you there for chess games. We don't need betting markets for the prediction's sake.

[somenameforme]

Polymarket not only doesn't charge a commission for market makers (the people who put out offers), but actually gives them a percent of all fees collected from market takers to help ensure and incentivize market liquidity. So if you could create a model that offered even slightly worse than market accuracy, you'd have an infinite money machine. It does not seem to exist.

And I think the reason for that is because a lot of these factors are unquantifiable, subjective, and non-fixed. For instance determining the winning chances for a human in a chess position is surprisingly complex. There's even a huge chunk of profit to be made for somebody that could create such a model outside of printing money in prediction markets - it'd be an invaluable tool for players to use during opening preparation since positions where winning chances don't correlate with computer eval are sort of the money-shot in human prep that's often motivated by a desire to avoid computer prep. And that factor is just 1 amongst many that can weigh in on an expert bettor's opinion.

[TZubiri]

Predictions markets are more regulated than sports betting, because the events being predicted are wider, so they will naturally touch on a whole lot more regulation.

For example, can someone place a bet on an event that X person will be shot? That question now touches on a whole range of laws regarding murder, life insurance, incitation to violence, free speech? That you just don't touch at all in sports betting.

[niwtsol]

I read your statement and my reaction is what you describe is less regulated than sports betting. For example, in sports betting there are laws by major leagues that players can not bet on games they are in. On prediction markets, if someone has insider knowledge, or can control whatever verification source is set for a bet, they can win (I believe there was an article posted earlier about some journalist reporting on a bomb that fell on an area and was pressured to change the wording to say it fell or was bombed). Additionally, as some of the prediction market wagers have weird grey areas, there are predictions that have additional sub text added after a market has been open/wages have been made which completely change the bet - that is just fast and loose and less regulation IMO

[TZubiri]

My main proposition was that prediction markets include sports betting as well as a bunch of other things, and they are therefore more regulated.

Did some research, and Kalshi (US based) is regulated by the CFTC, so they are already regulated by the same stuff that regulates securities, including price manipulation.

The subject of insider information is different because these are not public securities, there's no fiduciary responsibility. But it's not that there are no regulations, it's just that that specific regulation that we associate with the 2008 crisis just doesn't apply. But that doesn't mean there's no regulation, there's heaps, feel free to check out the CFTC website.

[Yizahi]

If Poly and Kalshi were actually prediction markets, then betting on a person getting shot and then murdering them yourself would both be allowed (by corporation only) and even encouraged. Because this is exactly what a perfect prediction is - you predict and then that happens with 100% guarantee. You are the best predictor and win.

But if Poly and Kalshi are gambling joints, then of course fixing gambling bets is no no, and that is what actually happens. They ban wins of market predictors who actually correctly predicted something but did it by fixing the game. A market prediction service wouldn't care about that, but gambling joint would.

[mcmcmc]

So where are those regulations?

[TZubiri]

I'm not a lawyer, and I originally made a claim about sportsbetting covering a a subset of prediction markets, so just being covered for more laws that are not necessarily related to bets.

But I made some research, and here's the main body that specifically targets 'regulation' regulations for prediction markets https://www.cftc.gov/LawRegulation/index.htm

I can see the argument that they are piggybacking off a body of regulations that wasn't designed for this. I'm not an attorney, so I don't know if that holds, but even if it does, it's undeniable that there are enough parallels between commodity futures and prediction markets and that's why it's being used to regulate so far.

If you argue for more or more specific regulation, it's probably going to be a fork, not regulation from scratch.

And as mentioned in other comments, there's existing laws around the subject of bets themselves that mean that there already exist loads of regulations around these subjects, in the end they are just contracts, which is one of the main branches of law and has a huge body of law and jurisprudence, so either it's inaccurate to say they are unregulated, or it regulation means something much more specific that I'm unaware of.

[kennywinker]

Lol. This is some quality sv psychosis content.

But ok, let’s follow your thought process. Couldn’t someone place a bet on a sporting event and then murder a key player? Wouldn’t all the same laws be triggered?

Laws against criminal activity aren’t regulations. Regulations are limitations and oversight requirements on business activities.

[TZubiri]

>" can someone place a bet on an event that X person will be shot? "

> Couldn’t someone place a bet on a sporting event and then murder a key player?

I don't follow, these are separate hypotheticals. For the record the answers would be:

1a) Can? Yes

1b) Legal? No, listing itself against public policy.

2a) Can? Yes

2b) Legal? No, murder is illegal

2c) Wager profits retained? No, slayer rule/No profit theory.

[kennywinker]

Re: 1b “public policy” is not law, so no it’s not “illegal” just against the betting site rules. Easily skirted by making the bet not directly about death, e.g. https://polymarket.com/event/trump-out-as-president-before-2...

Re: 2c also applies to scenario 1, if you get caught you can’t retain the money.

So, to your point about which is more regulated - there is no difference in the amount of regulation between the two scenarios.

[TZubiri]

>Re: 1b “public policy” is not law, so no it’s not “illegal” just against the betting site rules

Not a lawyer, but jurisprudence (case law) is law, especially in Common Law jurisdictions like the US it has even more weight than actually codified law (unlike for example napoleonic Civil Law like in Argentina or France).

"Restatement (Second) of Contracts" (1989), Chapter 8, has a pretty extensive list of restatement and examples of case law of contract nullity by being against public policy.

Additionally, it's even a more basic rule that contracts are void ab initio if they are about breaking a law, I can see how it might be argued that a contract about a murder is not about breaking the law, but it's debatable and probably fact dependent.

There's also probably statutes or UCC that explicitly state such rules, but that's secondary.

>Easily skirted by making the bet not directly about death, e.g. https://polymarket.com/event/trump-out-as-president-before-2...

Worth noting that polymarket is not in US Jurisdiction, so no, it's not regulated. Kalshi is in US jurisdiction and is regulated by US laws.

There was a case that reached some appeal court about election bet in Kalshi, and Kalshi won, you may agree or disagree, but it is under regulation.

>Re: 2c also applies to scenario 1, if you get caught you can’t retain the money.

Not necessarily, because both parties would be at fault in scenario 1. In scenario 2, the law would not declare the contract void, but award the payment to the non murdering party. In case 1 the whole contract is void, and the court will probably not get involved in any action whether forcing award of monies, nor forcing a party to return money, letting "the loss lies where it falls", in pari delicto.

>So, to your point about which is more regulated - there is no difference in the amount of regulation between the two scenarios.

It was a very basic mathematical claim, prediction markets include sports bets, so therefore they touch more regulations. The regulations the prediction markets touch is huge, as it can be about anything really, it must follow the regulations of almost every branch of contract law.

[vintermann]

> Couldn’t someone place a bet on a sporting event and then murder a key player?

Probably not, no. I would be very surprised if the sports betting shops didn't have some sort of "force majeure" clauses.

[kennywinker]

That seems like a good safeguard.

I don’t see any force majeure clauses here https://polymarket.com/event/trump-out-as-president-before-2... but maybe they’re hidden in the fine print?

[holistio]

Back in the good old days you needed a few more steps before you got into debt after gambling.

[ElProlactin]

Back in the good old days non-payment of gambling debt was a threat to your knee-caps. Today, you might get cut off from Klarna and have to extend your next auto loan to 256 months.

[tyre]

This was with their credit card. You're going to get demolished if you start bouncing gambling debt on a credit card.

I'm guessing that at some point, probably not very long from now, credit cards are going to cut down on this. They don't want to be held responsible for a bunch of debt from gamblers, when they've already paid the sites.

At some point, the fees won't be worth the combination of PR and actually losing money from bankruptcies / delinquencies.

[ElProlactin]

> You're going to get demolished if you start bouncing gambling debt on a credit card.

If you look at the finances of a good swath of Americans, they're already demolished. Heck, the average new car loan is now 6 years with a $700+/month payment.

Gambling has become such an embedded part of the current cultural zeitgeist because people feel they have nothing to lose.

[dfadsadsf]

> You're going to get demolished if you start bouncing gambling debt on a credit card.

If you do not have assets or high income, you can just ignore debt and it will drop off you credit report after 7 years. They can try to sue you (unlikely for <$5k debts) and then try to garnish wages (max 25% of aftertax income) but many states outright prohibit garnishment for consumer debts (like Texas) or limit it (like CA - just show that you have high living expenses to avoid garnishment).

Overall much better options that kneecaps.

[nradov]

Most of those gambling sites don't have merchant accounts and aren't able to accept credit card payments directly. Customers take out cash advances or buy cryptocurrency through various shady intermediaries, then transfer the assets.

[TZubiri]

Loan sharks that use threats still exist, non-bank personal lending funds use cold calling and connections with bankers and use non-staff third party callers to distance themselves from the consequences and reputation of threatening with violence.

So it's not like people need to go to shady lenders in the first place, they can be pipelined from normal credit card debt into less scrupulous debt collectors.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMntLU1bNE0

[dfadsadsf]

Does cold calling still works? I get so many spam calls that unknown numbers just go directly to voicemail that I check every other week or so. Pretty much everyone around me does the same. I do not remember when I got last legitimate call - it's all spam now.

The link you have is about business debt - that's likely much more collectable than CC debt.

[TZubiri]

The general rule is that if you see an attack/ad, it's because someone is falling for it.

Attacks have costs, no matter how marginal, and if someone is paying that, they are probably funding it with the victim payouts.

Very rarely will attacks be funded on hopes, and if that happens, it's not for long until they run out of funds and energy.

[everdrive]

>it showed a promo “would you like to split this payment over 12 month?” and seemingly was only available for that one transaction. So I could have deposited $1000 via CC into Kalshi and paid it back $83/mo over 12 months.

"Would you like to make decisions that are bad for you?" The future is indeed wild, and personal weakness is for sale. This isn't meant as an attack on you, but a lot of people will not be able to manage this sort of reduced friction. People with MBAs will call this "providing value."

[kleene_op]

> So I could have deposited $1000 via CC into Kalshi and paid it back $83/mo over 12 months

Are you sure those are the correct figures? That's a 4$ win in your favor if you don't use any of the deposited money and cash it back one year later.

[Pxtl]

Let's compare and contrast this to how credit card companies treat sexual content vendors. Remember when a raft of games got delisted on Steam because of pressure from cc companies?

[JoeMattie]

You think that's wild, look into prop firms some time

[ph4rsikal]

The on-ramp in crypto is incredibly well built out. But then, once you are in the fake money world, you will notice that the off-ramp doesn't exist.

[xboxnolifes]

The off-ramp of nearly all of my crypto endeavors has been very easy in my experience. Not always simple, because a lot of parts of moving money on various crypto chains is unintuitive and well in-need of improvement, but definitely easy once you know what to do.

The most annoying part, somewhat surprisingly, is always with regards to United States KYC restrictions. I've had a fair bit of annoyance trying to move crypto off of services that were once accessible to US customers and no longer are.

[ShinyLeftPad]

Offramp exists it just depends how ugly it is by country. A friend of mine literally travels to another country to withdraw what he is paid in crypto.

[consensus1]

I have taken money out of Polymarket and it is quick and easy.

[m00dy]

on-ramp and off-ramp were the problems of the past. Thanks to Trump, both worlds have merged together now.

[baobabKoodaa]

Off-ramp does exist. Stop lying.

[650REDHAIR]

Until you’re flagged for some vague reason and support/fraud can’t help you.

[citizenpaul]

I personally cant wait to start seeing sob stories of how people are having thier account permanently locked after making big wins. Thats what happens when you bgive money to unregulated casinos every tine and is the exact reason there are so many gambling laws and restrictions.

[RugnirViking]

have you tried to turn crypto into cash money in a real bank account? have you tried to do it with large amounts? would you describe that process as easy?

[derwiki]

It depends on what you mean by “large amounts,” but many “large amount” transactions trigger flags at the bank

[RugnirViking]

yes. For crypto platforms specfically, those "large amounts" can be pathetically small. Ive had no end of trouble even with amounts as low as $50 getting my card blocked until I call the bank

[bartread]

Yeah, and also inevitable that a product designed to so efficiently separate people from their money would be overrun by grifters and scammers from the influencer/creator world.

What does make this instance perhaps a bit surprising is that it's Polymarket themselves who are paying those grifters.

They're an incredibly well known US based company targeting US based consumers in a way that is patently illegal. It seems almost unbelievably dumb that they would do this even by the often grotty standards of gambling companies.

They must have realised this would be found out and that, when it was, an investigation and enforcement action would follow? I guess maybe some of the creators will find themselves in hot water as well?

I really don't understand what the long term play is here, other than to be litigated out of business.

[willsmith72]

Surely credit card has a terrible fee attached no? Just based on other services

[TheCowboy]

How were you able to use a credit card when it's not a payment they accept?

[chasebank]

They call it 'onramping'. Moonpay is a big one, coinbase has one, onramper is another. Basically Applepay / credit card -> ETH or SOL or USDC, etc, then lose away!

[cj]

I just checked my account.

They accept Visa, Mastercard and Discover via Apple Pay for a 2% deposit fee.

But I also see it says they don’t accept credit card in their help docs. I’m not sure what that’s about.