Sophia Puccini

So today we wanted to talk about the new law in Minnesota, which makes it a felony to operate a prediction market in the state.

Specifically, it is a felony to create, operate, or advertise a prediction market, and violators are facing up to five years in prison for this.

Minnesota is the first state to pass such a law.

The CFTC, part of the federal government, recently sued to block the law's passage, but as far as I know, it remains in force now.

So how could this have happened under our political system?

How do you start to convince the public more broadly that this technology is actually useful?

Because there seems to be this very persistent conception of prediction markets as something between wasteful gambling nonsense or immorally making money off of tragedy.

Those are the two attack angles I see.

Right.

So you wrote an article a few months ago called Prediction Markets Now.

What do I think of calci and poly markets specifically?

And you said you're mostly interested in the potential of stuff today to enable and cause that future vision and said, interestingly at the end, of course, if these systems induce a backlash that gets them outlawed or drastically shrunk, that may plausibly block or at least long delay my vision.

which seems to be happening right now.

I see many people complaining about these things.

I fear a new prudish temperance movement may shut them down and as a side effect, shut down the more promising markets that I've envisioned.

So how does your ultimate vision for this stuff differ from what we have today on Polymarket and Kalshi?

So how would a market become large and liquid enough to be useful if its purpose is just to advise a single individual?

Like it seems like only a few individuals would be able to have that.

So I wanted to pause on that because there actually is a real-life empirical example of prediction markets applied to dating, which was manifold love.

Yes, indeed.