Marc Andreessen's crypto SuperPAC spent $260 million in 2024 to successfully pressure politicians on crypto regulation, and now he's launching similarly massive AI-focused PACs that could dominate AI policy unless AI safety supporters organize their own political funding. Longer summary

Scott revisits his 2019 question about why there's so little money in politics relative to other industries, and reports that Marc Andreessen has essentially solved this puzzle by spending massively on crypto PACs in 2024 with overwhelming success. His Fairshake PAC raised $260 million (compared to AIPAC's $87 million), successfully pressured politicians into pro-crypto positions, and may have effectively purchased control over crypto regulation. Now Andreessen and others are launching AI-focused SuperPACs with $200+ million in funding, threatening to do the same for AI policy. Scott explains the mechanics of hard vs soft money, why the strategy worked, and ends by calling on AI safety supporters to organize their own political funding efforts to counter this influence. Shorter summary

Scott examines the recent crackdown on Polymarket, critiques US policy on prediction markets, and discusses the future and potential of both prediction markets and cryptocurrency. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses the recent $1.4 million fine imposed on Polymarket by the CFTC and its implications for prediction markets. He critiques the US government's approach to prediction markets, arguing it hinders better decision-making. The post explores the potential of prediction markets, what's needed for their success, and the challenges they face. It also touches on the broader implications for cryptocurrency and its original vision of creating censorship-resistant financial products. Shorter summary