Didn't say it was magic, there are faults. The market is not discontinuous, you certainly are not in direct competition but undoubtedly indirectly at their mercy. It would be foolish to think whatever acumen you may have will out perform and consistently perform as well as a well managed fund. Advances in programming, technology, the placement of servers and their large capital make it illogical to go throw away your money in cheap thrill. I am not saying you can't make some money, I'm saying its not worth the risk or time.

I don't completely agree with the ruling, however I am not one much for the practice of escaping jurisdiction by the argument of the hosts location. Don't take my words out of context. Just actually take a minute of your day to read one of the many takes on this event and the history preceding it before you respond. Intrade knew how they had violated a previous agreement with the CFTC. This not an issue of juris prudence or a debate on CFTC overstepping their bounds. Two parties came to an agreement, one broke it and punitive action was brought. Don't make it out to be anything else.

I don't trade thats what my computer is for. You will only be swept away by all of the HFT platforms

Refer to CFTCs brief and the many in agreement. This isn't libel. Intrade decided to stop for US traders without being directly ordered. Constitutional law is not even in the ball park. This not a matter of prohibition but regulation. It doesnt matter the host is in ireland if they are trading futures off exchange. If you cannot detect the potential issues at stake you do not deserve to trade.

No it's not legal. They had already agreed to stop solicitation and had paid a fine for it. They were allowing off-exchange options trading on gold,oil and currencies which already have a clearly legal and regulated way for traders to participate in the trade of those. By ignoring US law and their own agreement they are breaking the law. Don't use some moralist cop out logic based on false assumptions and inherit bias. I am not arguing with you on any philosophical or ideaological ground as such tenuous and tedious arguments are clearly without merit in a very cut and dry case of litigation. Detecting, policing and prosecuting fraud is by no means an easy job. Prosecuting Intrade only makes their job easier in allowing them go after the traders, and it should be their priority as they are the corporation perpetrating mass fraud not the traders.

Wow your sarcasm has completely damaged my argument by utterly avoiding it, congratulations. I'll restrain myself from ad hominem attacks further. Law enforcement is actually very difficult especially in an international setting with digital evidence and many plaintiffs. If the CFTC wants to enforce their laws setting precedent through pressuring the service's provider is a better option than dragging out litigation over 10-15 years it can even be done while much of the evidence is gone or blocked. In the meantime much more trading would continue only incentivising unregulated and potentially harmful futures trading. It would ideal for them to go after the traders but as the provider of service Intrade is just as, if not more, culpable. While the litigation stands on rather poor ground it has legal precedent and there is justifiable reason to use this case to further establish the CFTCs role.

I see your point, but going after the individuals is likely to take much, much longer and also due to how small the trades were, their likely ignorance of their wrong doing, the difficulty in gathering all the financials records and proving the culpability is insane. The potential political blow black is likely minor compared to being stuck in court for ten years. Instead using their political power and knowledge of the InTrades negligence in handling the situation the CFTC made the correct choice of attempting to cut the problem off at the head. Someone will figure out how to do it under the noses of the CFTC sooner than later.

A quote "Computer science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes." -- attributed to Edsger Dijkstra. As it has been said by other posters and Dijkstra, CS is in no way about the application. It is about algorithms among many other things and if by teaching a child about ecology you can give them a greater respect for the interrelationship between populations and their environment, perhaps teaching them simple CS will give them a better understanding of how to solve problems.