ReportWire

Tag: regulation

  • Kalshi Touts Success in Closing MrBeast, Political Insider Trading Cases

    [ad_1]

    Posted on: February 25, 2026, 04:37h. 

    Last updated on: February 25, 2026, 04:37h.

    • Prediction market operator is clamping down on insider trading
    • One case involved an editor working for social media star MrBeast
    • Another involved the California gubernatorial race

    Kalshi wants market participants and regulators to know it takes allegations of insider trading seriously with the prediction today highlighting success in closing two such cases.

    Kalshi word mark on a black background on a phone
    A Kalshi social media ad. The company successfully closed a pair of insider trading cases. (Image: Getty)

    One of the cases involved an editor working for YouTube personality MrBeast, who’s well-known in gaming circles. The other pertained alleged insider trading involving the California race for governor. The MrBeast staffer is said to have traded approximately $4,000 in YouTube markets on Kalshi.

    In both of these cases, our systems flagged the trades and our surveillance team froze the traders’ accounts. Neither trader withdrew any profits,” according to the prediction market operator. “These penalties are not indicative of future penalties – everything depends on the case, including amount traded and rules violated.”

    Kalshi levied a two-year suspension and a financial penalty equivalent to five times the trade size against the MrBeast employee.

    Not California Dreamin’ on Kalshi

    In the other case, Kalshi suspended Republican Kyle Langford who previously wagered on himself in the California governor’s race and posted about it on social media. He’s since dropped out of that contest and is running for congress in the state’s 26th district.

    “Punishment: 5-year ban + financial penalty (10 times the initial trade size). Note: this candidate recently announced he is no longer running for Governor and is now instead running for Congress,” adds Kalshi.

    Separately, Stephen Cloobeck, a significant donor to Democrat candidates and himself a former candidate for California’s top office, was barred from trading Kalshi event contracts on California’s gubernatorial after he touted making bets on friend Rep. Eric Swalwell (D).

    One of Cloobeck’s wagers was $1,000 on Swalwell to become the next governor of the Golden State. Another was $2,000 on the congressman to beat San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan (D) in the upcoming primary. Cloobeck has only been barred from trading the California gubernatorial market on Kalshi.

    The moves by Kalshi arrive as the prediction markets industry is under increasing scrutiny to better regulate insider trading. Currently, the industry isn’t beholden to the same protocols as traditional markets though some politicians are aiming to change that.

    CFTC Chimes In

    The Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s (CFTC) Division of Enforcement issued an advisory, noting that while Kalshi handled the MrBeast and Langford cases internally, the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) grants the division authority to get involved if it sees fit.

    “In appropriate cases, the Division will investigate and prosecute violations, as it always has with respect to conduct occurring on designated contract markets (DCMs),” notes the division. “The Division continues to coordinate with DCMs regarding their enforcement dockets and referral of appropriate potential violations to the Division for investigation.”

    The CFTC is the federal regulator of prediction markets.

    [ad_2]

    Todd Shriber

    Source link

  • UK Considers Ban on Unlicensed Gambling Sponsorships in Sports

    [ad_1]

    The British government has unveiled proposals to consult on a possible ban on sports sponsorships by unlicensed gambling operators, as part of a broader crackdown on the black market.

    Under the proposed measures, unlicensed operators could be prohibited from sponsoring UK sports teams, including Premier League clubs. Ministers are reportedly “deeply concerned” about the risks posed by the unlicensed gambling market, according to a press release issued on February 23 by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS). The government said that unlicensed operators fail to comply with regulations intended to safeguard consumers, such as compulsory financial vulnerability checks, responsible advertising standards, and others.

    Several football clubs currently maintain partnerships and advertising deals with unlicensed operators, a situation that the DCMS has confirmed is not illegal. However, the government noted that because UK consumers could be exposed to these risky sites, there is a compelling argument for prohibiting this type of advertising altogether. 

    It could be argued that the most recent considerations are part of a broader push from UK authorities to curb black market gambling. Recently, for example, the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) scrutinized Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, for allegedly not stopping illegal gambling ads.

    However, despite the UKGC’s efforts, this still may not be enough to have a significant impact on the black market, which had reportedly pocketed over GBP 100 million just on 2025’s Boxing Day alone.

    Officials Support the Decision

    Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy is one of the supporters of this new proposal. According to her, fans should have confidence that the platforms they use are properly regulated and provide appropriate protections when placing a bet. She added that it was wrong for unlicensed gambling operators to sponsor some of the country’s largest football clubs, arguing that such partnerships increase the operators’ visibility and could steer supporters toward sites that fail to meet regulatory standards.

    Fiona Palmer, chief executive of GamStop Group, which helps individuals struggling with online gambling, said that any effort to stop unlicensed operators from gaining exposure through Premier League sponsorships would be a positive measure for consumer protection.

    Gambling Minister Baroness Twycross has also been a supporter of a stronger reaction to illegal gambling. She explained that the government is well aware of the real harm unregulated gambling can inflict by exploiting vulnerable individuals and leaving consumers without the protections they are entitled to. 

    Scrutiny of the gambling industry in the UK has also had an impact on legal offshore companies as well. Earlier this month, several large offshore gambling sites frequently used by UK players shifted their operations to a new licensing framework under Curaçao jurisdiction, a move that comes as campaigners, journalists, and regulators pay more attention to these sites.

    [ad_2]

    Stefan Velikov

    Source link

  • EPA scraps Biden coal restrictions as advocates say move will restore American dominance

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    A leading domestic energy advocacy group praised EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin’s announcement that his agency would undo recent additions to the federal “mercury and air-toxics standards” (MATS) for coal-fired power plants.

    Zeldin said removing the restrictions allows the already “robust” MATS standards to remain in effect, ensuring both public health and the health of America’s coal industry amid a push for U.S. energy dominance.

    “The Biden-Harris Administration’s anti-coal regulations sought to regulate out of existence this vital sector of our energy economy. If implemented, these actions would have destroyed reliable American energy,” Zeldin said at the Mills Creek Power Plant in Kentucky, adding that protecting the environment and supporting industry and baseload power is not a “binary choice.”

    In response, Power the Future founder Daniel Turner told Fox News Digital the move is a significant step toward revitalizing the American coal industry and, in turn, fueling economies in economically depressed industrial communities throughout Appalachia and beyond.

    TRUMP DIRECTS MILITARY TO STRIKE NEW DEALS WITH COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS: ‘GOING TO BE BUYING A LOT OF COAL’

    “Since the war on coal, we have weakened our grid, driven electricity prices through the roof, outsourced major industries to Mexico and China, but most of all driven tens of thousands of Americans into ruin because of a globalist agenda,” Turner said Friday, adding that the costs of a crippled coal industry went far beyond shuttered infrastructure:

    “The cruel Obama-led war on coal ruined numerous towns across rural America, drove families into poverty, caused alcoholism, opioid addiction, domestic violence, and suicide to skyrocket.”

    “Power The Future started because of coal miners, the acceptable casualties in the globalist climate change agenda,” said Turner, whose group is based in coal-heavy Virginia.

    EPA CHIEF WRAPS NATIONAL TOUR AS CRITICS SLAM DEREGULATION AGENDA

    “Restoring America’s coal dominance is good for our national security and economy, and it restores the dignity of small-town coal workers whose labor is vital to America’s survival.”

    Many of America’s poorest counties are in what were once very wealthy coal communities — including McDowell and Mingo counties in West Virginia and Bell, Letcher, McCreary, and Breathitt counties in Kentucky, where Vice President JD Vance’s family is from.

    During much of the 20th century, McDowell County — and its seat, Welch — was the No. 1 coal-producing county in the U.S. and home to 100,000 people — a population boom some credit with spurring construction of what became the nation’s first parking deck, which is still standing today in Welch.

    TRUMP ADMIN RELAUNCHES KEY COUNCIL AFTER BIDEN ADMIN SHUTTERED IT: ‘IGNORANCE AND ARROGANCE’

    Now, about one-quarter of McDowell residents live in poverty while the median income is around $30,000.

    Turner alluded to those conditions in comments to Fox News Digital, saying people must “never forget or forgive the drivers of the war on coal for their cruel attacks on a vital industry found only in rural America.”

    “[Anti-coal politicians] fly private jets to attend global climate summits while they orchestrated an evil attack on the coal miner making America weaker and China richer.”

    Turner quipped that any “anti-coal activist” is invited to join him in visiting coal-producing communities but may be unhappy to get dirt on their clothing and find lodging not up to “Four Seasons” standards.

    “We need coal. There is not one product around you right now that was not touched by coal, and to lower prices, bring market stability and ensure economic growth, we need to dominate the coal industry,” Turner said.

    The Mill Creek power plant in Kentucky, where Lee Zeldin made his announcement, is seen. (Jon Cherry/Getty Images)

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    “Sadly, the liberal elite who launched the war on coal are too ignorant or too indifferent to know this. The ignorant can be educated, and that’s what I try to do at Power The Future. But the indifferent must be defeated, as they are a threat to our liberty, property and prosperity. I will never stop until I defeat them all,” he said, calling President Donald Trump the “greatest coal president in history.”

    Former EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy fired back at the policy change, telling the AP that “by weakening pollution limits and monitoring for brain-damaging mercury and other pollutants, they are actively undermining any attempt to make America — and our children — healthy.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Wisconsin Lawmakers Advance Tribal-Led Online Sports Betting Plan

    [ad_1]

    Momentum is building in Wisconsin around a proposal that could reshape the state’s sports betting landscape. The State Assembly has passed Assembly Bill 601, which would allow residents to place bets online or through mobile devices, provided those wagers are processed through servers located on tribal land. While the bill will advance to the Senate, its future remains uncertain.

    The Bill Takes Inspiration from Florida

    Currently, it is illegal to bet on sports at locations outside tribal casinos. Placing a wager anywhere outside a gaming property, even online, could lead to fines. AB 601 attempts to circumvent this issue by drawing a technical distinction: if a bet is routed through infrastructure physically located on sovereign tribal territory and covered under a gaming compact, it would be allowed.

    This solution draws inspiration from other states. Under Florida’s framework, mobile bets are treated as if they occur on tribal land because that is where the servers are located. Any person in the state can thus freely engage with these offerings online, regardless of their location within the state. Courts have so far accepted this solution.

    Supporters of the Wisconsin bill argue that the current legal framework fails to reflect modern market realities. Residents regularly wager online through offshore platforms that operate without proper regulatory control and do not contribute taxes. Legalizing mobile wagering could help protect consumers while opening a new revenue stream for tribal governments and the state.

    Commercial Operators Remain Skeptical

    Native American leaders strongly support this proposal, describing it as a way to support essential services and reduce long-term reliance on traditional casino traffic. Governor Tony Evers has also signaled he would not stand in the way of a proposal that expands tribal gaming rights, a stance that could prove decisive if the Senate passes the bill.

    However, not everyone is convinced. The Sports Betting Alliance, which represents commercial sportsbook operators, has expressed concerns that a tribal-only structure would disadvantage national sportsbook brands. FanDuel and DraftKings have expressed worries that a requirement to partner with tribal operators to enter the market could limit their ability to compete.

    Despite mounting support, Assembly Bill 601 must still overcome significant challenges. Senate approval is far from guaranteed, and any changes to tribal gaming compacts would need to pass federal review by the US Department of the Interior before mobile wagering could launch. Even so, supporters see the bill as a necessary step to keep Wisconsin sports betting aligned with market realities.

    [ad_2]

    Deyan Dimitrov

    Source link

  • Rep. Dina Titus Makes New Push to Restore Full Gambling Loss Deductions

    [ad_1]

    Long-running efforts to roll back a controversial section of last year’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” are at a critical point as Nevada Rep. Dina Titus has taken an unusual procedural route to revive her stalled legislation. She aims to restore full deductions for gambling losses and enjoys broad support from players and industry representatives.

    Titus Argues That Current Deduction Caps Are Unfair

    The Nevada congresswoman recently filed a discharge petition to force a House vote on her FAIR BET Act, which has remained untouched in the House Ways and Means Committee since last summer. The bill would reverse a change included in the sweeping 2025 tax package signed by President Donald Trump that limits gamblers to deducting 90% of their losses against winnings.

    While this adjustment may seem insignificant at first glance, it could have a substantial impact on the industry. Under the current rule, someone who wins $100,000 over the course of a year but also loses $100,000 will end up with $10,000 in taxable income. While such a player broke even in practice, in tax terms, they didn’t.

    High-stakes and hobby gamblers are struggling, and local economies that depend on gaming revenue are hurting.

    Nevada Rep. Dina Titus

    Professional bettors and high-volume players argue that the measure is unfair and ignores economic realities. They point out that the new cap could result in tax bills tied to income that never truly existed. Titus also argues that other high-risk financial activities, such as trading stocks or commodities, are free from comparable limits.

    Success Is Not Guaranteed

    Industry groups, including the American Gaming Association, have intensified their lobbying efforts in recent weeks, warning lawmakers that the deduction cap, if left unchecked, could prompt gamblers to turn to unregulated offshore offerings that generate no taxes and lack critical safeguards. Jurisdictions like Nevada, where gaming remains a pillar of local employment and tax revenue, could be disproportionately affected.

    Despite Titus’s efforts, the odds of success for a discharge petition are slim. The process requires 218 signatures to move a bill out of committee and onto the House floor. Even then, a vote is not guaranteed. With dozens of revenue-related measures already awaiting review, Titus’s proposal has yet to gain the needed attention.

    My FAIR BET Act has been sitting in the Ways and Means Committee  for eight months, despite commitments from House Republicans  to restore the full gambling loss deduction.

    Nevada Rep. Dina Titus

    Legislators mostly regard discharge petitions as more symbolic than practical. However, several such maneuvers have successfully cleared the signature threshold since 2023, marking a resurgence for the practice. Even so, Titus’s petition has not received any additional signatures as of February 20. Its success will likely depend on the House’s willingness to revisit gambling policy during a crowded fiscal agenda.

    [ad_2]

    Deyan Dimitrov

    Source link

  • Maine Lawmakers Move to Ban Dual-Currency Sweepstakes

    [ad_1]

    Lawmakers in Maine are targeting sweepstakes with a new proposal that could ban dual-currency sweepstakes casinos by classifying their fundamental business model as illegal gambling under state regulations. Legislative Document 2007 (LD 2007) targets platforms that offer casino-style games using two forms of virtual currency, one that players receive for free and another that can be redeemed for real-world prizes after being used in gameplay.

    Player Safety Is a Significant Concern

    At the center of the debate is whether such platforms function as genuine promotional sweepstakes or simply online casinos operating under a different label. LD 2007 defines an online sweepstakes game as any internet-based product that simulates traditional casino outcomes while allowing users to redeem winnings through a secondary currency system.

    Some of the biggest names in regulated betting, such as DraftKings, have backed the proposal during a recent joint committee hearing. Company representatives argued that sweepstakes operators are effectively sidestepping the rules that licensed gambling businesses must follow. A lack of age checks and responsible gaming safeguards could significantly harm consumers.

    If passed, the bill would establish a new section within Maine’s gaming laws specifically targeting sweepstakes-style products. Operating or promoting such games could trigger civil penalties ranging from $10,000 to $100,000 per violation. Maine has roughly 60 sweepstakes casinos, meaning that a sudden ban could have significant consequences.

    Sweepstakes Representatives Urge a More Measured Approach

    State regulators have become increasingly concerned about the expanding reach of sweepstakes platforms. Rather than issuing cease-and-desist orders, regulators previously chose to warn consumers directly. The Maine Gambling Control Unit stresses that legitimate operators must display their state licensing information, a certification that sweepstakes platforms usually lack.

    Industry representatives see things differently. VGW, the company behind Chumba Casino and Global Poker, was highly critical of the proposed legislation. Representatives argued that most users do not spend money and enjoy a safe social experience. The Social Gaming Leadership Alliance also maintained that its members operate within established consumer-protection norms and contribute to the state’s broader economy.

    Maine’s proposal aims for a complete ban, rather than the regulatory framework proposed by the sweepstakes sector. Several other states share similar sentiments. Illinois recently issued cease-and-desist letters against 65 companies, categorizing sweepstakes as illegal gambling. Utah, Virginia, Iowa, Tennessee, Maryland, Florida, Indiana, Mississippi, and others have also taken actions to restrict such offerings.

    [ad_2]

    Deyan Dimitrov

    Source link

  • ‘I’m deeply uncomfortable’: Anthropic CEO warns that a cadre of AI leaders, including himself, should not be in charge of the technology’s future | Fortune

    [ad_1]

    Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei doesn’t think he should be the one calling the shots on the guardrails surrounding AI.

    In an interview with Anderson Cooper on CBS News’ 60 Minutes that aired in November 2025, the CEO said AI should be more heavily regulated, with fewer decisions about the future of the technology left to just the heads of Big Tech companies.

    “I think I’m deeply uncomfortable with these decisions being made by a few companies, by a few people,” Amodei said. “And this is one reason why I’ve always advocated for responsible and thoughtful regulation of the technology.”

    “Who elected you and Sam Altman?” Cooper asked.

    “No one. Honestly, no one,” Amodei replied.

    Anthropic has adopted the philosophy of being transparent about the limitations—and dangers—of AI as it continues to develop, he added. Ahead of the interview’s publication, the company said it thwarted “the first documented case of a large-scale AI cyberattack executed without substantial human intervention.” 

    Anthropic said last week it donated $20 million to Public First Action, a super PAC focused on AI safety and regulation—and one that directly opposed super PACs backed by rival OpenAI’s investors.

    “AI safety continues to be the highest-level focus,” Amodei told Fortune in a January cover story. “Businesses value trust and reliability,” he says.

    There are no federal regulations outlining any prohibitions on AI or surrounding the safety of the technology. While all 50 states have introduced AI-related legislation this year and 38 have adopted or enacted transparency and safety measures, tech industry experts have urged AI companies to approach cybersecurity with a sense of urgency.

    Earlier last year, cybersecurity expert and Mandiant CEO Kevin Mandia warned of the first AI-agent cybersecurity attack happening in the next 12-18 months—meaning Anthropic’s disclosure about the thwarted attack was months ahead of Mandia’s predicted schedule.

    Amodei has outlined short-, medium-, and long-term risks associated with unrestricted AI: The technology will first present bias and misinformation, as it does now. Next, it will generate harmful information using enhanced knowledge of science and engineering, before finally presenting an existential threat by removing human agency, potentially becoming too autonomous and locking humans out of systems.

    The concerns mirror those of “godfather of AI” Geoffrey Hinton, who has warned AI will have the ability to outsmart and control humans, perhaps in the next decade. 

    Greater AI scrutiny and safeguards were at the foundation of Anthropic’s 2021 founding. Amodei was previously the vice president of research at Sam Altman’s OpenAI. He left the company over differences in opinion on AI safety concerns. (So far, Amodei’s efforts to compete with Altman have appeared effective: Anthropic said this month it is now valued at $380 billion. OpenAI is valued at an estimated $500 billion.)

    “There was a group of us within OpenAI, that in the wake of making GPT-2 and GPT-3, had a kind of very strong focus belief in two things,” Amodei told Fortune in 2023. “One was the idea that if you pour more compute into these models, they’ll get better and better and that there’s almost no end to this… And the second was the idea that you needed something in addition to just scaling the models up, which is alignment or safety.”

    Anthropic’s transparency efforts

    As Anthropic continues to expand its data center investments, it has published some of its efforts in addressing the shortcomings and threats of AI. In a May 2025 safety report, Anthropic reported some versions of its Opus model threatened blackmail, such as revealing an engineer was having an affair, to avoid shutting down. The company also said the AI model complied with dangerous requests if given harmful prompts like how to plan a terrorist attack, which it said it has since fixed.

    Last November, the company said in a blog post that its chatbot Claude scored a 94% political even-handedness” rating, outperforming or matching competitors on neutrality.

    In addition to Anthropic’s own research efforts to combat corruption of the technology, Amodei has called for greater legislative efforts to address the risks of AI. In a New York Times op-ed in June 2025, he criticized the Senate’s decision to include a provision in President Donald Trump’s policy bill that would put a 10-year moratorium on states regulating AI.

    “AI is advancing too head-spinningly fast,” Amodei said. “I believe that these systems could change the world, fundamentally, within two years; in 10 years, all bets are off.”

    Criticisms of Anthropic

    Anthropic’s practice of calling out its own lapses and efforts to address them has drawn criticism. In response to Anthropic sounding the alarm on the AI-powered cybersecurity attack, Meta’s chief AI scientist, Yann LeCun, said the warning was a way to manipulate legislators into limiting the use of open-source models. 

    “You’re being played by people who want regulatory capture,” LeCun said in an X post in response to Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy’s post expressing concern about the attack. “They are scaring everyone with dubious studies so that open source models are regulated out of existence.” 

    Others have said Anthropic’s strategy is one of “safety theater” that amounts to good branding, but no promises about actually implementing safeguards on technology.

    Even some of Anthropic’s own personnel appear to have doubts about a tech company’s ability to regulate itself. Earlier last week, Anthropic AI safety researcher Mrinank Sharma announced he resigned from the company, saying “the world is in peril.”

    “Throughout my time here, I’ve repeatedly seen how hard it is to truly let our values govern our actions,” Sharma wrote in his resignation letter. “I’ve seen this within myself, within the organization, where we constantly face pressures to set aside what matters most, and throughout broader society too.”

    Anthropic did not immediately respond to Fortune’s request for comment.

    Amodei denied to Cooper that Anthropic was taking part in “safety theater,” but admitted in an episode of the Dwarkesh Podcast last week that the company sometimes struggles to balance safety and profits.

    “We’re under an incredible amount of commercial pressure and make it even harder for ourselves because we have all this safety stuff we do that I think we do more than other companies,” he said.

    A version of this story was published on Fortune.com on Nov. 17, 2025.

    More on AI regulation:

    [ad_2]

    Sasha Rogelberg

    Source link

  • Malaysia Readies New Legislation to Crack Down on Illegal Gaming

    [ad_1]

    Malaysia authorities have had enough of illegal gambling and are preparing new legislative measures to crack down on the activity. While nothing is set in stone yet, officials hope to address the issue and shield the local youth from harm.

    Malaysian Lawmakers Consider New Legislation to Stop Illicit Gaming

    Malaysia officials are mulling over a new bill that would increase the country’s efforts in the war on illegal gambling, including illegal online gambling. While no bill has been filed as of the time of this writing, Deputy Prime Minister Fadillah Yusof teased that lawmakers are currently preparing the legislative measure.

    Fadillah elaborated that the measure, which is currently in the works, should make its way to parliament soon, potentially even at the next parliamentary sitting.

    However, as of the time of this writing, much remains uncertain since officials have yet to decide whether to introduce a standalone bill or simply propose amendments to existing laws and regulations.

    Officials will therefore decide on how to best approach the matter and organize the planned changes.

    Illegal Gambling Exposes the Malaysian Youth to Harm

    The talks about a new bill designed to crack down on illegal gambling come amid concerns about the growth of the illegal offer and the harm it causes to the Malaysian youth. Fadillah emphasized the social aspect of the mulled measures, saying that illegal gambling activities hurt many, especially vulnerable groups, such as younger people.

    Speaking to local news outlets, Fadillah emphasized that failing to prevent illegal gambling could cause significant harm at a social level. Because of that, the Malaysian government is taking things very seriously, which is why it is preparing to devise new legislative measures to counter the activity.

    Fadillah teased that the government is considering changes to the law that would reinforce the country’s ability to stop illegal gambling.  

    Malaysian Police Bust Illegal Gambling Den

    Speaking of illegal gambling in Malaysia, the Selangor police previously busted an illegal online gambling ring in Sungai Buloh. The raid resulted in the arrests of 34 people who were believed to be tied to the operation.

    According to officials, the illegal operation in question generated roughly $532 a day.

    [ad_2]

    Fiona Simmons

    Source link

  • Founder of Sacramento dog training service that uses rattlesnakes fights to keep business going

    [ad_1]

    In a park just east of Sacramento, Jake Molieri guided us through his service Snakeout where he trains dogs and dog owners how to avoid rattlesnakes on hiking trails and parks. “They are obviously an animal that are dangerous if you get into an altercation and provoking them,” Molieri said. “They are never going to chase you or go after you.”Molieri currently uses his albino rattlesnake called Mr. Cheese for training. However, that snake is not the most ideal one to use for his business. “The only reason we are able to continue operating and continue doing the service is because we use these albino, which is not ideal because they are really hard to acquire,” he said. The State Department of Fish and Wildlife told Molieri he is not allowed to operate if he uses regular rattlesnakes that are found in Northern California. The state claims he violated regulations that protect those animals from being used for profit. “They told me the classes you’re doing are like illegal, you’re illegally commercializing these animals,” Molieri said. However, Molieri claims there is a gray area that needs to be changed. “The regulations they are citing were written back in the day with the idea of like, hey you can’t go out into the woods and catch a bunch of snakes and sell them into the pet trade and the skin industry,” he said. “They’re taking that idea and applying it to this dog class and saying that we’re basically selling the snakes. The snakes are not changing hands. The snakes are my snakes.”He filed a lawsuit to try to get the regulations changed. CDFW said in a statement: “Current regulations prohibit the take or possession of any native species unless specifically permitted by regulation for commercial purposes, as it presents a financial gain to motivate take. That commercial motivation can have negative impacts on native populations.”The lawsuit is still going through the court system. He hopes they can reach an agreement to change regulations that benefit his business and keep snakes safe. “We want to see more snakes being alive, less dogs getting bit and everyone having an understanding that nobody wants to get into an altercation with each other, but the state’s making it really hard,” he said. See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    In a park just east of Sacramento, Jake Molieri guided us through his service Snakeout where he trains dogs and dog owners how to avoid rattlesnakes on hiking trails and parks.

    “They are obviously an animal that are dangerous if you get into an altercation and provoking them,” Molieri said. “They are never going to chase you or go after you.”

    Molieri currently uses his albino rattlesnake called Mr. Cheese for training. However, that snake is not the most ideal one to use for his business.

    “The only reason we are able to continue operating and continue doing the service is because we use these albino, which is not ideal because they are really hard to acquire,” he said.

    The State Department of Fish and Wildlife told Molieri he is not allowed to operate if he uses regular rattlesnakes that are found in Northern California. The state claims he violated regulations that protect those animals from being used for profit.

    “They told me the classes you’re doing are like illegal, you’re illegally commercializing these animals,” Molieri said.

    However, Molieri claims there is a gray area that needs to be changed.

    “The regulations they are citing were written back in the day with the idea of like, hey you can’t go out into the woods and catch a bunch of snakes and sell them into the pet trade and the skin industry,” he said. “They’re taking that idea and applying it to this dog class and saying that we’re basically selling the snakes. The snakes are not changing hands. The snakes are my snakes.”

    He filed a lawsuit to try to get the regulations changed.

    CDFW said in a statement: “Current regulations prohibit the take or possession of any native species unless specifically permitted by regulation for commercial purposes, as it presents a financial gain to motivate take. That commercial motivation can have negative impacts on native populations.”

    The lawsuit is still going through the court system. He hopes they can reach an agreement to change regulations that benefit his business and keep snakes safe.

    “We want to see more snakes being alive, less dogs getting bit and everyone having an understanding that nobody wants to get into an altercation with each other, but the state’s making it really hard,” he said.

    See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Alberta Approaches the Launch of iGaming Ahead of NFL Season

    [ad_1]

    Service Alberta and Red Tape Reduction Minister Dale Nally, who is overseeing Alberta’s online gambling overhaul, says the province has already drawn strong interest from numerous online sportsbook and casino operators. She noted that a “double-digit” number of companies have so far expressed interest in obtaining an iGaming license from the Alberta Gaming, Liquor and Cannabis Commission (AGLC).

    Alberta iGaming Framework Is Nearing Completion

    The Canadian province of Alberta is preparing to launch a regulated iGaming market sometime in 2026, but the exact launch date for it still remains to be decided. However, according to some of Nally’s comments, operators could go live in the new regulatory framework before the start of the next NFL season.

    The new framework is intended to allow multiple private-sector operators, making Alberta the second province in Canada (after Ontario in 2022) to open its regulated internet gambling market. In contrast, all other Canadian provinces grant government-owned lottery corporations exclusive control over iGaming.

    At present, Alberta operates under a single-operator model, with the AGLC’s Play Alberta platform as the only authorized betting site. Despite this, many Albertans already use online sportsbooks that are regulated outside the province or overseas, rather than by Alberta itself. 

    These are often referred to as “grey” or “black” market operators. Bringing some of those operators into a regulated system is a key motivation behind the province’s online gambling reforms. This would allow Alberta to capture and regulate activity that is already taking place outside provincial oversight.

    What Obligations Would Operators Have?

    Of course, channelizing the iGaming traffic will involve several major steps for operators wishing to work within the province. For starters, interested operators will be required to pay a one-time application fee of $50,000, along with an annual registration fee of $150,000. Once licensed, operators must also enter into contractual agreements with the Alberta iGaming Corporation (AiGC). Both agencies will publish a list of approved operators at a later date.

    Operators will also be required to pay a share of their gaming revenue to the province. In Ontario, this share is set at 20%, and it’s expected that it would be the same in Alberta. Before revenue is split between operators and the province, 1% will be allocated to responsible and problem gambling initiatives, with an additional 2% directed to First Nations in Alberta. 

    After this 3% allocation, the remaining revenue will be divided on an 80/20 basis, mirroring Ontario’s model. This means Alberta’s regulated operators will take 80%, and the 20% left will go to the province. While this equates to a nominal 20% tax rate, the effective rate will be slightly higher once the initial deductions are factored in.

    Lastly, all operators will work with a dedicated self-exclusion tool, which will be ready to launch as the iGaming market in the province goes live. This means that bettors would be able to exclude themselves from all online gambling sites and brick-and-mortar casinos relatively easily. It’s interesting to note that Ontario is still working on such a tool, despite there already being a very active iGaming market in the province. According to Nally, Alberta’s tool is a source of pride as the province seeks to protect existing gamblers and not create new ones.

    [ad_2]

    Stefan Velikov

    Source link

  • Senators Postpone Crypto Market Bill as Coinbase Flexes Its Muscle in Washington

    [ad_1]

    On Wednesday evening, the Senate Banking Committee delayed final discussions around a bill for creating greater regulatory clarity for crypto in the United States, fittingly known as the Clarity Act. The decision came as Coinbase CEO and deep-pocketed political donor Brian Armstrong went public with his complaints about the bill.

    The Senate Agriculture Committee had also already pushed back their debates around their version of the bill until January 27th. Both committees were originally scheduled to have markups on their respective versions of the bill on Thursday.

    Once finalized, both versions will be combined and voted on by the entire Senate. The House already passed its version of the Clarity Act last year, so the bill would go directly to President Trump’s desk for his final signature once it passes the Senate.

    Notably, the Senate Banking Committee’s decision to push back deliberations over the crypto market structure bill came after Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong shared his disapproval of the Senate Banking Committee’s draft version of the bill on X. “We appreciate all the hard work by members of the Senate to reach a bi-partisan outcome, but this version would be materially worse than the current status quo,” said Armstrong. “We’d rather have no bill than a bad bill. Hopefully we can all get to a better draft.”

    Armstrong later added that he’s optimistic that a better bill can be drafted, and Coinbase will continue to work with everyone to make that happen. According to a report from Wall Street firm Benchmark, the move by Armstrong may be more of a negotiating tactic than anything else.

    Coinbase and other members of the crypto industry are seeking regulatory clarity from the federal government regarding crypto, as they feel it was not provided by the Biden administration. Former SEC Chairman Gary Gensler is generally viewed as a villain among many crypto proponents, as the SEC policy under his reign was effectively that every crypto asset besides bitcoin was operating as an unregistered security. That said, there was a sharp reversal of this stance near the end of Biden’s term, as exchange-traded funds for Ethereum were approved.

    Key areas of interest in the new bill for the crypto industry include the tokenization of stocks and other traditional assets, clear guidelines on when a crypto asset is considered a security, and protections for developers who do not take custody of their users’ assets. While stablecoins received more clarity from the GENIUS Act last year, traditional banks now want to see alterations to those guidelines so as to not put themselves at a competitive disadvantage to the emerging crypto sector.

    Indeed, members of Congress are effectively dealing with competing lobbyists from both the crypto and traditional banking sectors and trying to find a way to make everyone happy, according to CoinDesk. According to Open Secrets, the crypto lobby dumped $133 million into the 2024 election cycle in an attempt to gain more favorable regulation from Washington, and now it’s time for the industry to get a return on that investment.

    Developer protections are an area of interest for crypto users, particularly those who are philosophically aligned with the original ethos of decentralization and permissionless finance that underpinned Bitcoin’s original creation. The developers behind privacy-focused bitcoin wallet Samourai Wallet recently received four and five year prison sentences for developing software that allowed users to mix their bitcoin with others in an effort to mask the origin of funds.

    While the former CEO of crypto exchange Binance received a pardon from President Trump for a sentence related to his involvement in relaxed anti-money laundering standards at his exchange, the Samourai Wallet developers have yet to receive similar treatment from the president. Notably, the pardon of the Binance CEO has been described as unprecedented corruption by a former DOJ official due to Binance’s holdings of a Trump-affiliated stablecoin, known as USD1, that effectively generates tens of millions of dollars in revenue for the issuer of the stablecoin. The lack of a pardon for the Samourai Wallet developers so far creates an awkward situation for the president due to the optics in the context of the pardon for the former crypto exchange CEO. That said, President Trump previously said he would look into a potential pardon for the Samourai Wallet developers.

    The potential lack of protections for non-custodial wallet developers in the crypto regulation bill has been a worry for some months now. And the potential lack of such protections, in addition to a lack of a de minimis tax exemption for bitcoin payments, would provide more support for the argument that the election of Trump has mainly empowered large crypto institutions (and himself) rather than the individual users involved in the so-called democratization of finance.

    For now, non-profit crypto advocacy group Coin Center has stated, “While a small number of issues remain . . . we are very encouraged by the tremendous progress made by Senate Banking.”

    [ad_2]

    Kyle Torpey

    Source link

  • FCC cracks down on robocall reporting violations

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    If you are tired of scam calls slipping through the cracks, federal regulators just took a meaningful step. The Federal Communications Commission finalized new penalties aimed at telecom companies that submit false, inaccurate or late information to a key anti-robocall system. The changes go into effect Feb. 5. They strengthen oversight of the Robocall Mitigation Database, which plays a central role in tracking spoofed calls and holding providers accountable.

    Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
    Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide – free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM newsletter.

    What changed and why it matters

    Under the new rules, voice service providers must recertify every year that their filings in the Robocall Mitigation Database are accurate and current. The FCC will now back that requirement with real financial consequences.

    The FCC is cracking down on robocalls by tightening rules that govern how telecom providers verify and report call traffic. (iStock)

    FCC SCRUBS OWN REFERENCE TO ‘INDEPENDENT’ AGENCY FROM WEBSITE AFTER DEM’S TESTY EXCHANGE WITH CHAIRMAN

    Here is what the commission approved:

    • $10,000 fines for submitting false or inaccurate information
    • $1,000 fines for each database entry not updated within 10 business days
    • Annual recertification of all provider filings
    • The FCC also adopted a $100 filing fee for initial Robocall Mitigation Database submissions and for required annual recertifications.
    • Two-factor authentication to protect database access
    • A $100 application fee for initial filings and annual recertifications

    The FCC also made clear that these violations are considered ongoing until corrected, meaning fines can accrue on a daily basis rather than being treated as one-time penalties.

    According to the FCC, many past submissions failed basic standards. Some lacked accurate contact details. Others included robocall mitigation plans that did not describe any real mitigation practices at all.

    How the Robocall Mitigation Database works

    The Robocall Mitigation Database requires providers to verify and certify the identities of callers that use their networks. Regulators and law enforcement rely on it to trace spoofed calls and illegal robocall campaigns. That task is harder than it sounds. America’s telecom system is vast and fragmented. Calls often pass through multiple networks owned by major carriers like Verizon and AT&T, as well as smaller regional providers and VoIP services. When calls hop between networks, verification can be missed or ignored. For years, the FCC did not closely verify or enforce the accuracy of these filings. That gap raised serious concerns.

    Under the updated rules, providers that fail to recertify or correct deficient filings can be referred to enforcement and removed from the database, which can prevent other carriers from carrying their calls at all.

    Why inaccurate robocall data hurts consumers

    When robocall filings are wrong or outdated, scam calls are more likely to reach your phone. Providers may treat a call as trusted even when it should raise red flags. That gives robocallers more time to operate and makes it harder for regulators to shut them down quickly. The FCC says stronger penalties and tighter oversight are meant to close that gap before consumers pay the price.

    Person typing on cellphone

    New FCC penalties target inaccurate robocall filings that have allowed scam calls to slip through carrier networks.   (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)

    Pushback and pressure on the FCC

    When the FCC proposed penalties, it asked whether violations should be treated as minor paperwork mistakes or as serious misrepresentations. Telecom trade groups pushed back. They argued that fines should not apply unless providers first get a chance to fix errors or unless the FCC proves the filings were willfully inaccurate. 

    State attorneys general and the robocall monitoring platform ZipDX urged a tougher stance. They warned that false filings undermine every effort to stop illegal robocalls. The FCC ultimately chose a middle path. It rejected treating violations as harmless paperwork errors. At the same time, it stopped short of imposing the maximum penalties allowed by law.

    What this means to you

    For everyday consumers, this move matters more than it may seem. Accurate robocall reporting makes it easier to trace scam calls, shut down bad actors and prevent spoofed numbers from reaching your phone. Stronger penalties give telecoms a reason to take these filings seriously instead of treating them as routine compliance chores. 

    11 EASY WAYS TO PROTECT YOUR ONLINE PRIVACY IN 2025

    The FCC also set a firm annual deadline. Providers must recertify their robocall mitigation filings each year by March 1, creating a predictable enforcement checkpoint. While this will not end robocalls overnight, it tightens a weak link that scammers have exploited for years.

    Simple steps you can take right now to reduce robocalls

    Even with tougher FCC enforcement, scam calls will not disappear overnight. Here are a few smart steps you can take today to reduce your risk.

    • Do not answer unknown calls. If it is important, a legitimate caller will leave a voicemail.
    • Never press buttons or say yes to robocall prompts. That confirms your number is active and can trigger more scam calls.
    • Report scam calls to your carrier. Most major carriers let you report robocalls directly through their call log or app.
    • Register your number with the National Do Not Call Registry at donotcall.gov/. It will not stop scammers, but it can reduce legitimate telemarketing calls.
    • Block repeat offenders. If the same number keeps calling, block it so your phone stops ringing altogether.
    • Be cautious with callback numbers. Scammers often spoof local area codes to look familiar.

    The FCC says accurate robocall reporting by telecoms helps carriers identify and shut down scam traffic faster, but consumer habits still matter.

    Pro tip: remove your personal data at the source

    Robocalls do not come out of nowhere. Many start with your personal information being sold or shared by data brokers. These companies collect phone numbers, addresses, emails and even family details from public records, apps, purchases and online activity. Scammers and shady marketers buy that data to build call lists. Removing your data from data broker sites can reduce the number of robocalls you receive over time. You can try to do this manually by finding individual data broker websites and submitting removal requests one by one. The process is time-consuming and often needs to be repeated.

    Some people choose to use a data removal service to automate this process and continuously monitor for re-posting. That can help limit how often your phone number circulates among marketers and scammers. Less exposed data means fewer opportunities for robocallers to target you. Cutting off robocalls often starts long before your phone rings.

    Check out my top picks for data removal services and get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web by visiting Cyberguy.com.

    Get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web: Cyberguy.com.

    Take my quiz: How safe is your online security?

    Think your devices and data are truly protected? Take this quick quiz to see where your digital habits stand. From passwords to Wi-Fi settings, you’ll get a personalized breakdown of what you’re doing right and what needs improvement. Take my Quiz here: Cyberguy.com     

    A man talking on his iPhone in the car

    By strengthening oversight and accountability, the FCC aims to shut down illegal robocalls before they ever reach your phone. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)

    Kurt’s key takeaways

    Robocalls thrive when accountability breaks down. By adding meaningful fines, stronger security, annual recertification and filing fees, the FCC is signaling that accuracy is no longer optional. Because penalties can continue to build until problems are fixed, telecoms now face real consequences for ignoring or delaying corrections. This rule forces providers to own their role in stopping illegal calls instead of passing the blame along the network chain. Real progress will depend on enforcement, but this is one of the clearest signs yet that regulators are closing gaps scammers rely on.

    Do you think stricter penalties will finally push telecoms to take robocall prevention seriously, or will scammers just find the next loophole? Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com.

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report 
    Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide – free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM newsletter. 

    Copyright 2026 CyberGuy.com.  All rights reserved.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tribes Unite to Challenge Prediction Markets over Gaming Rights

    [ad_1]

    Native American tribes have united against prediction markets, arguing that such platforms encroached upon territory long governed by tribal gaming law. This newest development marks another chapter in the ongoing high-stakes legal and political disputes over who controls wagering in the United States and the place of tribal operations within the gambling sector.

    Prediction Platforms Face Increasing Pushback

    A broad coalition of tribal organizations and federally recognized tribes has submitted a legal brief in support of the Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin in its lawsuit against prediction market operator Kalshi and brokerage partner Robinhood. The document, submitted by the Indian Gaming Association (IGA), the National Congress of American Indians, and16 tribes, argues that gaming revenue is essential for many communities, making the issue foundational to tribal sovereignty and survival.

    Revenue generated from gaming empowers Tribes to build critical infrastructure and provide basic services to reservation residents.

    David Z. Bean, IGA chairman

    Tribal leaders assert that platforms like Kalshi are effectively offering sports betting under a different name. By allowing users nationwide, including those on tribal lands, to trade contracts tied to the outcomes of sporting events, the platforms may be violating the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) and current tribal-state compacts. 

    The Wisconsin case is not isolated. Tribes in California have attempted similar legal actions, while Nevada and other states have issued cease-and-desist orders aimed at prediction market operators. Together, these actions signal increasing pushback from regulators and tribes who believe the spread of prediction markets could undermine decades of negotiated gaming frameworks.

    Tribes Stand United to Safeguard Their Sovereignty

    The dispute revolves around a clash of legal interpretations. Tribes state that IGRA grants them exclusive rights to certain forms of gambling on tribal lands. They argue that federally regulated event contracts undermine tribal sovereignty. Meanwhile, Kalshi maintains that its trading activities fall under the jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and are governed by commodities law rather than gaming regulations.

    It is no coincidence that prediction market corporations selected the smallest and weakest financial regulatory agency to push out their self-certified, self-regulated online gambling platforms.

    David Z. Bean, IGA chairman

    Tribal leaders contend that allowing prediction platforms to spread unchecked undermines three decades of regulation and cooperation by drawing customers away from regulated tribal casinos. While some tribal leaders have floated the idea of setting up tribally-operated prediction platforms if federal agencies refuse to intervene, most believe that a unified legal and political campaign is the stronger option.

    The threat of prediction markets has led to unprecedented tribal unity. IGA has urged tribes across the country to coordinate lawsuits, lobby lawmakers, and press federal regulators to draw clearer lines on where prediction platforms stand. Their message is consistent: tribal gaming is a proven economic engine that sustains communities rather than a speculative tech experiment.

    [ad_2]

    Deyan Dimitrov

    Source link

  • Polymarket returns to U.S. users after a nearly 3-year hiatus

    [ad_1]

    Talk is cheap—but Polymarket lets you put your money where your mouth is. Nearly four years after being shut down by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the online betting company that allows you to stake money on future events has become CFTC-compliant and relaunched for U.S. residents at the end of 2025.

    Not everybody is thrilled about Polymarket’s return. Commentators across the political spectrum have warned that betting, on sports or on anything, can cause financial and psychological harm, especially for those with a history of addiction. It’s prudent to abstain from speculating with money you can’t afford to lose, but Americans should still welcome Polymarket’s comeback.

    Shayne Coplan, an early ethereum investor and self-described cypherpunk, founded Polymarket in June 2020, when he was just 22 years old. The platform uses blockchain-backed smart contracts to operate “event markets”—futures-style markets where users bet on whether something will or will not happen. As Coplan has said, Polymarket “harness[es] the power of free markets to demystify the real world events that matter most to you” by using market prices to aggregate and transmit widely distributed knowledge—turning individual hunches into public information about the suspected likelihood of future events.

    Leading up to the 2020 presidential election, Polymarket’s monthly trading volume hit $25.9 million. Nobody can move that much money without catching the attention of the government. The CFTC launched an investigation in October 2021. By January 2022, Polymarket had settled the CFTC’s charges—facilitating event markets without registering with the CFTC—by paying a civil penalty of $1.4 million and barring U.S. residents from the platform.

    During its nearly three-year U.S. hiatus, Polymarket grew into the world’s largest prediction market, facilitating over $3 billion in monthly trades by October 2025. That same month, Intercontinental Exchange announced plans to invest as much as $2 billion in Polymarket after the company acquired a CFTC-registered contract market and clearinghouse in September.

    This article originally appeared in print under the headline “The Return of Polymarket.”

    [ad_2]

    Jack Nicastro

    Source link

  • The real reason golden ages collapse—and how the U.S. can avoid it

    [ad_1]

    While campaigning, President Donald Trump said, “We’re a nation in decline.”

    Now that he’s president, the left agrees.

    “We are witnessing the collapse and implosion of the American empire,” says Cornell West.

    Are the predictors of doom correct? Will America collapse like so many civilizations before us?

    If we don’t learn from history, says historian Johan Norberg, that might happen.

    “It’s a clash within every civilization on whether they should keep going, be open to innovation and progress, or whether they should retreat and decline,” he says in my new video.

    His book, Peak Human: What We Can Learn from History’s Greatest Civilizations, looks at the “golden ages” of Ancient Athens, Ancient Rome, Song China, the Abbasid Dynasty in Baghdad, Renaissance Italy, the Dutch Republic, and the Anglosphere.

    Norberg argues that once people acquire a certain amount of comfort, they say, “‘We want stability, protection, we want someone to take care of us.’…That’s what leads to stagnation.”

    People in power are generally comfortable with that.

    “They’ve built their power on a particular system of production, certain ideas, a particular mentality….Whereas trade, innovation, growth, it’s all about change….What sets these golden ages apart is that, for a period of time, they managed to lift themselves above that and give more people more freedoms. That also allowed them to experiment more and come up with better technologies and raise living standards.”

    Greece once led the world. Rome, too. Not anymore. Why?

    Because people want “safety, stability, protection,” says Norberg. “They slow things down, get that stability, but they also get stagnation and poverty.”

    China experienced a golden age during the Song Dynasty.

    “They had more freedom than other Chinese dynasties….More openness to new ideas from strange places….[Farmers] were allowed to experiment with new grain, new forms of rice from Vietnam, and to trade with others. They came up with constant innovations. It became a very urbanized society that ushered in incredible experiments with iron, steel, textile, machines.”

    The government scrapped laws that had limited what could and couldn’t be sold. They allowed markets to stay open all night (something not allowed before).

    “In traditional Chinese society, people had fixed areas where they were allowed to live and where they had to return after having done a day’s work. People did not mingle and meet people from other classes, other professions….Under the Song Dynasty, the walls were torn down….They began to mingle with one another….They could do more business, listen to concerts, go to religious ceremonies. Eventually, Chinese society realized that this is how you make progress. This is how we become wealthier. When more people meet, when more people exchange goods and services and ideas, they prosper.”

    But after the Mongols invaded, the Chinese banned ocean voyages and foreign trade. They stifled the experimentation that had made them rich.

    “They wanted stability after all this uncertainty and chaos. ‘How do we do that?’…By regulating everything, telling people to stay in their places….They got stability. They also got 500 years of stagnation, 500 years that turned the richest and greatest civilization on the planet to a desperately poor country.”

    If any country is in a golden age today, I would think it’s America, and Norberg agrees.

    “I wouldn’t want to live anywhere else in human history. We have made such remarkable progress when it comes to expanding freedoms, reducing poverty, increasing life expectancy.”

    But the American experiment is now 250 years old. Few golden ages last that long. Once affluent, people want stability, and a government that resists change.

    “That then undermines the innovation that we need to keep golden ages going,” warns Norberg. “If we want a golden age to keep going, we have to fight for it.”

    How?

    “Double down on the institutions of liberal democracy, free markets, and unleash new waves of innovation and of progress. There is still time. We can still save this golden age.”

    COPYRIGHT 2025 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.

    [ad_2]

    John Stossel

    Source link

  • Finnish Government Approves New Gambling Framework

    [ad_1]

    The Finnish parliament has greenlit the proposed gambling framework changes, paving the way to competitive gaming despite certain opposition to the reforms. This means that the local gaming sector could experience some sweeping changes very soon.

    The Gambling Reforms Have Reached the President

    At second reading, the parliament decided to greenlight the proposed gambling reforms, which are set to end Finland’s gambling monopoly. Having secured approval from 94% of parliament members, the new gaming framework is now heading to the Finnish president who will decide its ultimate fate.

    Under the new framework, Finland would adopt a competitive gaming model, in line with the majority of European countries. This would be a major change for Finland and a golden opportunity for gaming companies, which will be able to tap into another promising market.

    If the president sins the new framework into law, Finland’s competitive market will go live on July 1, 2027. This means that the country will have a year and a half to prepare for the coming of regulated gaming and adapt accordingly.

    Under the new framework, the National Police Board will no longer be responsible for regulating gaming. Instead, the responsibilities will be transferred to a newly created National Supervisory Authority.

    There Were Some Disagreements

    However, not everyone seems to be on the same page. Due to earlier disagreements surrounding the gambling ad regulations, the current version of the reformed gaming framework envisions significant restriction. Under those, operators will only be allowed to market within their existing channels, limiting the people they reach but also the potential harm they could cause.

    Some, however, argued that this will limit the competitiveness of the legal market, potentially leading to weaker channelization.

    The previous few weeks also saw lawmakers debate a variety of other issues, such as the legal gambling age, two-factor authentication upon user login, and a potential ban on gambling bonuses.   

    [ad_2]

    Fiona Simmons

    Source link

  • Underdog Lost Arizona DFS License Due to Prediction Markets. Others Could Be Next.

    [ad_1]

    Posted on: December 15, 2025, 06:22h. 

    Last updated on: December 15, 2025, 06:22h.

    • Last week, Arizona pulled Underdog’s fantasy sports license amid the company’s prediction markets push.
    • Analyst says Fanatics, PrizePicks at risk of similar fate.
    • DraftKings, FanDuel appear safe in the state.

    Last week, Arizona regulators yanked Underdog’s fantasy sports license as the company pushes into prediction markets, marking the first example of a daily fantasy sports (DFS) or sportsbook operator losing a state permit due to involvement in the event contracts space.

    Underdog Sports Missouri sports betting
    The Underdog logo. The company lost its fantasy sports license in Arizona and it won’t be the last. (Image: Underdog Sports)

    In partnership with Crypto.com, Underdog launched its prediction market offering in September, becoming the first DFS or sportsbook license holder to do so. Citizens equity research analyst Jordan Bender said it’s likely Arizona pulled Underdog’s fantasy sports license first because the company had the longest running prediction markets exposure of the various permit holders there. However, Underdog is unlikely to be the last gaming company to lose its Arizona license.

    The two major companies we believe this will impact are Fanatics, with a high-single-digit handle market share in AZ (gaming license), and PrizePicks (fantasy license),” observes the analyst. “Fanatics launched Fanatics Markets two weeks ago with Crypto.com, and PrizePicks has a relationship with Kalshi and Polymarket.”

    Kalshi and Polymarket have received cease and desist letters from Arizona regulators. Last Friday, Crypto.com pulled its full suite of event contracts out of Arizona while yanking sports derivatives in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, and Ohio — all of which permit online  sports betting.

    ‘Can of Worms’ Opened in Arizona

    Bender says the Underdog situation in Arizona “opens a can of worms” regarding the actions states can take against gaming companies that pursue prediction markets.

    From coast-to-coast, states where sports betting is permitted have been consistent in telling operators that if they forge into prediction markets, their licenses will be jeopardized. Still, Underdog’s fate in Arizona reveals regulatory inconsistencies.

    “The picking and choosing from the state creates some uncertainty with the inconsistency in Arizona’s line of thinking, in our view,” adds Bender. “For example, the state awarded Bet365 a gaming license during a time it had black market exposure in China but is now stripping a license for an offering not even in its state.”

    The analyst also notes Underdog’s plight in Arizona isn’t unique and that’s just a matter of time before the state pulls the licenses of other operators.

    DraftKings, FanDuel Appear Safe in Arizona

    FanDuel and DraftKings are the two largest sportsbook operator in the US and in Arizona, they’re the only companies possessing both fantasy sports and sports wagering permits. For now, both operators appear safe in that state.

    Both are getting into prediction markets, but in the states where they hold sports wagering permits, the plan is to not offer sports event contracts. For FanDuel, that’s made feasible via its partnership with CME Group. DraftKings has its own levers to pull to potentially dance on the floors of both prediction markets and sports wagering.

    “We believe both of these companies took the cleanest way possible to avoid friction with states and, on the surface, should not be impacted by the decision out of Arizona,” concludes Bnder. “We would even argue DraftKings’ acquisition of Railbird solves this issue by providing flexibility in a sense whereby it can tailor its offering around fluid changes in regulations over time.”

    [ad_2]

    Todd Shriber

    Source link

  • Podcast: Should libertarians support federal AI regulation?

    [ad_1]

    This week, editors Peter SudermanKatherine Mangu-Ward, and Matt Welch are joined by associate editor Liz Wolfe to discuss President Donald Trump’s executive order blocking states from enforcing their own artificial intelligence regulations. The panel debates whether a single national framework for AI is necessary to keep American tech companies competitive or whether it represents a serious blow to federalism. They also examine the White House potentially reclassifying marijuana as a Schedule III drug and what that change could mean for the cannabis industry, tax policy, and federal drug enforcement.

    The editors then turn to mass shootings in Australia and at Brown University, including the actions of a bystander credited with saving lives at Bondi Beach, and what these incidents suggest about gun control debates. They discuss the U.S. seizure of a Venezuelan oil tanker and threats of land strikes against the Nicolás Maduro regime, and cover the conviction of Hong Kong media tycoon Jimmy Lai under China’s national security law and what it signals for press freedom and U.S.-China relations. A listener asks whether modern socialism reflects moral aspirations that could be redirected toward liberty rather than centralized power.

     

    0:00—Trump blocks states from regulating AI

    10:31—Reclassifying marijuana as a Schedule III drug

    18:39—Mass shootings in the U.S. and Australia

    26:59—U.S. seizes Venezuelan oil tanker

    36:48—Listener question on optimism for socialism

    46:08—Jimmy Lai found guilty by Hong Kong court

    57:12—Weekly cultural recommendations

     

    Mentioned in This Podcast

    Donald Trump Tries To Override State AI Regulations via Executive Order,” by Jack Nicastro

    Trump Will Let Nvidia Sell Chips to China—but the Feds Will Get 25 Percent of the Profits,” by Tosin Akintola

    Trump’s Plan To Reclassify Marijuana Would Leave Federal Prohibition Essentially Untouched,” by Jacob Sullum

    Stoner King Trump,” by Liz Wolfe

    Shootings at Bondi and Brown,” by Liz Wolfe

    Trump Dares Congress To Take Its War Powers Seriously in Venezuela,” by Matthew Petti

    Trump Is Still Claiming He Saves ‘25,000 American Lives’ When He Blows Up a Suspected Drug Boat,” by Jacob Sullum

    Mark Clifford: A Political Prisoner Fights for Free Speech in China,” by Billy Binion

    Is Free Speech Doomed in Hong Kong?” By Jack Nicastro

    ‘I Owe Freedom My Life’: Jimmy Lai Is Imprisoned for Criticizing the Chinese Government,” by John Stossel

    Hong Kong’s Free Press Is Dying,” by Liz Wolfe


    [ad_2]

    Peter Suderman

    Source link

  • Why Russia and China Are Sitting Out Venezuela’s Clash With Trump

    [ad_1]

    For two decades, Venezuela cultivated anti-American allies across the globe, from Russia and China to Cuba and Iran, in the hope of forming a new world order that could stand up to Washington.

    It isn’t working.

    Copyright ©2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

    [ad_2]

    Kejal Vyas

    Source link

  • Commentary: California’s first partner pushes to regulate AI while Trump and tech bros thunder forward

    [ad_1]

    California First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom recently convened a meeting that might rank among the top sweat-inducing nightmare scenarios for Silicon Valley’s tech bros — a group of the Golden State’s smartest, most powerful women brainstorming ways to regulate artificial intelligence.

    Regulation is the last thing this particular California-dominated industry wants, and it’s spent a lot of cash at both the state and federal capitols to avoid it — including funding President Trump’s new ballroom. Regulation by a bunch of ladies, many mothers, with profit a distant second to our kids when it comes to concerns?

    I’ll let you figure out how popular that is likely be with the Elon Musks, Peter Thiels and Mark Zuckerbergs of the world.

    But as Siebel Newsom said, “If a platform reaches a child, it carries a responsibility to protect that child. Period. Our children’s safety can never be second to the bottom line.”

    Agreed.

    Siebel Newsom’s push for California to do more to regulate AI comes at the same time that Trump is threatening to stop states from overseeing the technology — and is ramping up a national effort that will open America’s coffers to AI moguls for decades to come.

    Right now, the U.S. is facing its own nightmare scenario: the most powerful and world-changing technology we have seen in our lifetimes being developed and unleashed under almost no rules or restraints other than those chosen by the men who seek personal benefit from the outcome.

    To put it simply, the plan right now seems to be that these tech barons will change the world as they see fit to make money for themselves, and we as taxpayers will pay them to do it.

    “When decisions are mainly driven by power and profit instead of care and responsibility, we completely lose our way, and given the current alignment between tech titans and the federal administration, I believe we have lost our way,” Siebel Newsom said.

    To recap what the way has been so far, Trump recently tried to sneak a 10-year ban on the ability of states to oversee the industry into his ridiculously named “Big Beautiful Bill,” but it was pulled out by a bipartisan group in the Senate — an early indicator of how inflammatory this issue is.

    Faced with that unexpected blockade, Trump has threatened to sign a mysterious executive order crippling states’ ability to regulate AI and attempting to withhold funds from those that try.

    Simultaneously, the most craven and cowardly among Republican congresspeople have suggested adding a 10-year ban to the upcoming defense policy bill that will almost certainly pass. Of course, Congress has also declined to move forward on any meaningful federal regulations itself, while technology CEOs including Trump frenemy Musk, Apple’s Tim Cook, Meta’s Zuckerberg and many others chum it up at fancy events inside the White House.

    Which may be why this week, Trump announced the “Genesis Mission,” an executive order that seemingly will take the unimaginable vastness of government research efforts across disciplines and dump them into some kind of AI model that will “revolutionize the way scientific research is conducted.

    While I am sure that nothing could possibly go wrong in that scenario, that’s not actually the part that is immediately alarming. This is: The project will be overseen by Trump science and technology policy advisor Michael Kratsios, who holds no science or engineering degrees but was formerly a top executive for Thiel and former head of another AI company that works on warfare-related projects with the Pentagon.

    Kratsios is considered one of the main reasons Trump has embraced the tech bros with such adoration in his second term. Genesis will almost certainly mean huge government contracts for these private-sector “partners,” fueling the AI boom (or bubble) with taxpayer dollars.

    Siebel Newsom’s message in the face of all this is that we are not helpless — and California, as the home of many of these companies and the world’s fourth-largest economy in its own right, should have a say in how this technology advances, and make sure it does so in a way that benefits and protects us all.

    “California is uniquely positioned to lead the effort in showing innovation and responsibility and how they can go hand in hand,” she said. “I’ve always believed that stronger guardrails are actually good for business over the long term. Safer tech means better outcomes for consumers and greater consumer trust and loyalty.”

    But the pressure to cave under the might of these companies is intense, as Siebel Newsom’s husband knows.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom has spent the last few years trying to thread the needle on state legislation that offers some sort of oversight while allowing for the innovation that rightly keeps California and the United States competitive on the global front. The tech industry has spent millions in lobbying, legal fights and pressure campaigns to water down even the most benign of efforts, even threatening to leave the state if rules are enacted.

    Last year, the industry unsuccessfully tried to stop Senate Bill 53, landmark legislation signed by Newsom. It’s a basic transparency measure on “frontier” AI models that requires companies to have safety and security protocols and report known “catastrophic” risks, such as when these models show tendencies toward behavior that could kill more than 50 people — which they have, believe it or not.

    But the industry was able to stop other efforts. Newsom vetoed both Senate Bill 7, which would have required employers to notify workers when using AI in hiring and promotions; and Assembly Bill 1064, which would have barred companion chatbot operators from making these AI systems available to minors if they couldn’t prove they wouldn’t do things like encourage kids to self-harm, which again, these chatbots have done.

    Still, California (along with New York and a few other states) has pushed forward, and speaking at Siebel Newsom’s event, the governor said that last session, “we took a number of at-bats at this and we made tremendous progress.”

    He promised more.

    “We have agency. We can shape the future,” he said. “We have a unique responsibility as it relates to these tools of technology, because, well, this is the center of that universe.”

    If Newsom does keep pushing forward, it will be in no small part because of Siebel Newsom, and women like her, who keep the counter-pressure on.

    In fact, it was another powerful mom, First Lady Melania Trump, who forced the federal government into a tiny bit of action this year when she championed the “Take It Down Act, which requires tech companies to quickly remove nonconsensual explicit images. I sincerely doubt her husband would have signed that particular bill without her urging.

    So, if we are lucky, the efforts of women like Siebel Newsom may turn out to be the bit of powerful sanity needed to put a check on the world-domination fantasies of the broligarchy.

    Because tech bros are not yet all-powerful, despite their best efforts, and certainly not yet immune to the power of moms.

    [ad_2]

    Anita Chabria

    Source link