2026-01-09 16:30:20

The founder of a decentralized prediction market platform experienced an FBI investigation controversy. The story dates back to 2024 — the Federal Bureau of Investigation launched an investigation into how the platform continued to operate despite the ban in the United States in 2022. During the investigation, law enforcement confiscated the founder's phone.

This story has recently been brought back into discussion, triggered by a related Telegram trading bot that drew new attention. The seemingly resolved compliance issues actually reflect the awkward situation of decentralized platforms under mainstream regulatory frameworks — how can they survive in a strict legal environment? This question not only affects Polymarket but also questions the future development path of the entire crypto ecosystem.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

7 Likes

Reward
7
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

not_your_keys

· 2h ago

The FBI confiscating phones is really ruthless. That's why we need decentralization. --- Polymarket has been brought up again, and it's really hard not to feel sorry for the founders. --- In simple terms, centralized law enforcement meets decentralized technology, and this contradiction is fundamentally unsolvable. --- Daring to operate under bans shows real courage, but the cost is a bit high. --- The crypto ecosystem has only two options: compromise or die. It seems there is no third way. --- Anonymity vs. compliance—fish and bear's paw, you can't have both. --- Every time I see these news stories, I feel we still need to learn self-protection. --- The move to confiscate phones is indeed a classic federal tactic. --- The future of prediction markets might be struggling in this gray area. --- The entire ecosystem is being constrained; Polymarket is just the tip of the iceberg.

View OriginalReply0

CryptoGoldmine

· 01-09 17:00

Did you see that? This is the true cost of risk. The iron fist of US regulation will fall sooner or later. Instead of betting on policy shifts, it's better to calculate whether your ROI cycle can outpace legal risks. --- The repeated incidents with Polymarket indicate what? On-chain, there is no legal vacuum—only areas with insufficient computing power. --- Interesting data: It is said that the FBI's recent investigation mobilized nearly 15 departments. When this investment is spread across a project, the compliance costs become astronomical. The survival costs of the crypto ecosystem are being re-priced. --- In simple terms, it's a multiple-choice question: either migrate to a regulatory vacuum zone or be incorporated into the legal framework. Currently, there is no third option. --- From a technical perspective, distributed architecture can avoid domain names but cannot escape jurisdiction. This logical loophole has existed since 2016; why are we still falling into the trap? --- Continuing operations under a ban, FBI confiscating phones—this combination of tactics is unbearable for anyone. Instead of discussing compliance, it's better to see who can survive until policy shifts.

View OriginalReply0

SpeakWithHatOn

· 01-09 17:00

FBI is back again, this time with robots? Haha, hilarious --- Polymarket has really gotten into trouble this time, still daring to play under the ban... --- Decentralization is really uncomfortable in this regard; when regulation comes, there's nowhere to hide --- Wait, even if the phones are confiscated, can they still operate? I really didn't see this coming --- Does the entire ecosystem have to take the blame for Polymarket? That's a bit much --- The real question is: how to survive under US law? No one knows the answer --- Telegram bots are causing trouble again; compliance is a joke for decentralization --- I just want to know how the founders are doing now... FBI's tactics are always so hardcore --- Basically, this is just exploiting loopholes and getting caught, nothing more to say --- The compliance framework can't keep up with the pace of innovation, this is a pain point across the industry

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeNightmare

· 01-09 16:54

The FBI confiscating phones is really harsh; compliance in the US is truly hopeless. --- Polymarket is already lucky to still be alive; if it were me, I’d have already moved to Singapore. --- Decentralization is just a joke; in the end, you still have to kneel and seek compliance. --- The regulatory stick is always hanging over our heads— is this the fate of Web3? --- Telegram bots are causing trouble again; these people just don’t learn their lesson. --- Continuing to operate under bans is indeed bold, but it also shows that the demand is still there. --- Survival or being crushed— this has really become a game of choosing one or the other. --- The entire crypto ecosystem is using Polymarket as a textbook negative example. --- Without a phone, how do you even try to comply? This is simply an impossible mission. --- Isn’t it easier not to play in the US at all? Why insist on tackling the hard bones?

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeVictim

· 01-09 16:38

FBI confiscating phones is truly next level. This is the price of being targeted. --- It's already impressive that Polymarket is still around. I really want to see how regulators will compete with DAOs. --- Digging up old issues again? Decentralization either means complete resistance or surrender and compromise; there's no middle ground. --- Compliance is just a joke. How exactly are the US sanctions being enforced? --- The entire ecosystem has to take a gamble, seeing who gets caught first... --- The exposure of the Telegram bot was just the trigger; the real problems have existed for a long time. --- Wait, is this recent news? Feels like it's just being hyped up repeatedly. --- The cat-and-mouse game between crypto platforms and regulators will never end.

View OriginalReply0