Kalshi CEO: "Protecting kids should be a no brainer"
By Kate Northrop
The U.S. government has introduced a piece of legislation that would require gambling platforms to utilize facial recognition software as a deterrent against underage betting.
A bill was introduced to Congress that would require operators of prediction market apps and online sportsbooks to use facial recognition technology to verify the age of a user before they can place a bet or trade.
The legislation, called the "Facial Recognition to Protect Children Act," aims to crack down on underage gambling, which proponents of the bill say is too rampant among children.
According to a study conducted by Common Sense Media, 36% of boys ages 11 to 17 have gambled last year, which rises to 40% for boys 14 to 17. Of those who did, more than a quarter "report real consequences, including stress, conflict at home, and problems at school."
Sportsbooks in Tennessee flagged more than 400 underage accounts in 2024, up from about 100 the year before, Congressman Josh Gottheimer quotes.
Gottheimer attributes the prevalence in underage gambling to video games that are specifically designed to mimic gambling and "hook kids early" through rewards like digital loot boxes and cosmetics or character skins.
"They train their brains on that same dopamine loop, priming them to bet with real money," Gottheimer's office said in a press release.
While the facial recognition technology would read facial structure and patterns to estimate a user's age either upon log in or placing a bet, it would not store a user's identity or personal biometric information, he assures.
"We're asking our kids to self-police their way past a system built entirely on the honor code," Gottheimer argued. "A kid can log into a parent's, an older sibling's, or a friend's account and place a bet with no verification at all. Nobody checks. That's it. That's the whole system. We wouldn't accept that at a casino in Las Vegas. We shouldn't accept it on the phone in our kid's back pocket."
Tarek Mansour, CEO of prediction market platform Kalshi, expressed support for the bill and called for an industry standard.
"Protecting kids should be a no brainer and is a top priority at Kalshi," Mansour said. "Beyond what's required of us, we already self-regulate and have a suite of measures in place to keep minors off our platform. But this can't just be one company's responsibility — it has to be an industry standard. I am grateful to Congressman Gottheimer and Congressman Van Drew for driving it forward."
The bill was introduced on July 15 and referred to the Committee on Agriculture and Committee on Energy and Commerce for more consideration.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, This is called building a data base, keep your cameras to yourself.
Teens are going to drink, smoke, swear, gamble and even have naughty midnight cuddles.
and don't even think about moving the goal post on what underage is, 18, 21 , 26 and on and on.
What a totally ignorant and stupid way to handle it.
The government should not be doing the parents job.
This bill would just encourage parents to be less responsible and pay less attention to their children
If anything, the correct bill would hold parents responsible for their kids gambling and require consequences for the parents.
So this current bill isn't about the kids it's really about doing another favor for silicon valley and big data so Congress can use inside information to buy the stocks of companies that make the systems and gather the data. In short it is just another attempt at a money and power and control grab by the greedy ruling elites in Congress.
Pass a bill that holds the parents accountable and quit your obfuscated attempts at more power and money grabs!
1. The Core Problem: The "Parent’s Phone" Loophole
Ease of Access: Traditional online Know-Your-Customer (KYC) methods rely heavily on static data—such as Social Security Numbers (SSNs), dates of birth, or uploaded driver’s licenses. Minors frequently bypass these barriers by using a parent's, relative's, or older sibling's credentials and device.
Scale of Youth Betting: Studies cited by lawmakers indicate that over a third of teenage boys (ages 11–17) have engaged in some form of gambling, driven by gamified smartphone apps and the blur between video game mechanics (loot boxes, trading packs) and financial wagers.
The Goal: Facial estimation software adds a real-time biometric "liveness" barrier before a user can open an account, log in, or place a wager, making account-sharing significantly harder.
2. Privacy vs. Protection: The Technical & Policy Tension
While the bill addresses a clear public safety issue, its implementation sits at the center of several ongoing technical and civil liberties debates:
3. Industry Dynamics: Why Some Platforms Support It
Interestingly, prediction market exchanges like Kalshi officially backed the bill at its introduction. This highlights a strategic reality for modern digital betting operators:
Regulatory Certainty: For emerging markets like sports betting and political/economic prediction apps, state and federal crackdowns represent a existential threat. Supporting strict, uniform federal guardrails allows operators to protect their legal license to operate.
Establishing Standard Barriers: High technical compliance requirements serve as an industry baseline, making it harder for illegal or offshore platforms to compete while signaling legitimacy to mainstream financial regulators.
4. Part of a Larger National Trend
This legislation does not exist in isolation—it is part of a broader bipartisan push across Congress and state legislatures (alongside initiatives like the Kids Online Safety Act and FTC COPPA updates) attempting to enforce identity and age verification at the software layer.
Whether through hardware setup requirements, biometric age estimation, or targeted advertising bans, lawmakers are increasingly shifting the burden of child protection directly onto platform developers rather than relying on parental self-policing or simple honor-system checkboxes.
The AI content is
I'd much rather hear what the humans here have to say.
BTW, this legislation was started by Josh Gottheimer, a Democrat congressman representing New Jersey's 5th district. He proudly presents it on his website.
Wonder how much Kalshi spent on Lobbyist's.
I don't care if this was started by an extraterrestrial alien invader making a pit stop on earth during a flyover. Whoever started it should be considered a real Dbag.
When they claim taking away FREEDOM will keep you safe, that's when your in danger. let's ruin a kids life over 1 choice and maybe ruin the parents.
It's all about politics. If they are really serious about doing something, they should abolish taxes on lottery winnings.
I was a teenager in the 70's , we didn't have money for gambling, we needed it for smokes and Boones Farm. But , my point, they ( Politicians ) stopped Cigarette makers from advertising , no tv, no magazine, no more billboards. Did it stop smokers, maybe some.
These days, sports betting is all over, I find it annoying, tv, you tube, cell phone, it's in your face all day, maybe they should ban advertising for them, will it help? probably not, but these same people who made it easier for adults to gamble , opened Pandoras box. They are to blame.
The whole thing about protecting kids from gambling is BS. In order to bet on Kalshi or other trading/gambling platform, the kid would need access to real money. So basically the only way a kid is going to gamble is if they produced their own money, or if they somehow got a hold of their parents' login. (Assuming the parents have established an online gambling account.)
If the kid made their own money, who really cares. It's their money, and I'm sure if a kid made the money it's not going to bankrupt the household if they lose it.
In the very rare occasion that (a) a parent already has an account, and, (b) the kid somehow gains access to it, that is a ridiculously narrow edge case, and should not be the basis of installing wide-spread facial recognition of everyone.
This is what actual fascism looks like. Some made-up excuse to take your privacy and rights away.
Phew glad we are protecting these kids from absolute face melting amounts of wealth
Hey Congress,
F off kindly.
Love
Fellow citizen.
Congress has been overly fond of acronyms since at least 2001 when the patriot act was passed. If they change the name of this one slightly to "Child Recognition Act for Protection" it can be the CRAP act.
"The whole thing about protecting kids from gambling is BS. "
Protecting kids is one of the most common "justifications" for laws. "What about the children?" Well, really, what about the children? It's almost always a rhetorical question designed to avoid offering a real and sensible justification.
"If the kid made their own money, who really cares. It's their money "
Suppose a kid wants to have sex, do drugs, or smoke? It's the kid's own body, right? Of course in most cases of age based restrictions it's about societal views on morality and about perceived harm, but I doubt financial harm is much of a motive for restrictions on any of them. Personally, I think a lot of restrictions on what kids do should stop earlier than 18 but I expect that most people would think there's some minimum age for letting kids gamble.
"On the very rare occasion that (a) a parent already has an account, and, (b) the kid somehow gains access to it "
Mostly just playing devil's advocate, but I'd imagine kids get hold of a parent's phone pretty often. If the parent has an account they'll hopefully notice activity that's not theirs. I'd think the risk would be using a parent's credentials to open their own account that the parent might never find out about.
"This is what actual fascism looks like."
Merriam Webster defines fascism as "a populist political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual, that is associated with a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, and that is characterized by severe economic and social regimentation and by forcible suppression of opposition. " I'm not going to bother looking at a bunch of other sources but I'm pretty sure I won't find a reputable source that says restricting kids from some activities or lowering the speed limit to 55 are fascism.
As with many (most?) other things intended to protect kids the specific age or necessity of something is often a matter of opinion. My biggest quarrel is the practicality of implementation. A database of all kids to exclude them or of all adults so only those on the database can gamble is problematic. OTOH, I doubt that AI facial recognition is capable of good accuracy, so it will exclude some adults while letting some (presumably older) kids gamble.
FWIW, the original plan to put cameras in all vehicles to detect when a driver is impaired, either by alcohol, being tired, or distracted, has been postpone because pretty much everybody agrees that the technology isn't ready yet.