Recent scandals involving pro athletes and gambling have led to discussions around the proliferation of gambling apps and the influence of betting on our society.

In his Fintech Takes Newsletter, my friend Alex Johnson wrote, “the resurgence of gambling in our culture has already had devastating consequences on the lives and balance sheets of American consumers and their families.”

I think his argument is sound, and I think that it is easy to see that gambling may be having a corrosive effect elsewhere in our society. Will anyone watch sports if they think the players are more interested in winning bets than in playing the game?

Alex suggests institutions make saving money more fun. He mentions successes like prize-linked savings and positive messaging writing, it “might seem like a small thing, but this stuff matters. It’s the same reason why Robinhood used to celebrate customers’ trades with virtual confetti.”

But there is a dark side to fun finances.

Robinhood’s confetti is cited as an example of a practice that can actually lead customers to make bad choices in a report entitled “Hooked and Hustled: The Predatory Allure of Gamblified Finance.” This important paper outlines the risks that come with introducing game-like features to accounts.

“Gamblification blurs the line between investing and gambling, transforming financial Decision-making into a high-stakes game that exploits cognitive biases and behavioral vulnerabilities. What was once seen as an exciting and democratizing force in finance increasingly reveals itself as a sophisticated form of predatory finance,” the authors write.

The paper delves into how people can be manipulated by influencers, trends, and behavioral tools into making bad financial decisions. For example, it notes that even things like lottery jackpots can influence people’s financial decisions.

“Recent U.S. data from [trading apps] and national lottery systems demonstrate a negative correlation between lottery jackpot size and retail trading activity. Specifically, larger lottery jackpots correlate with a measurable decline in retail trading, suggesting that heightened lottery participation diverts investors’ attention from financial market engagement.”

The paper also points out that there is an asymmetry in power between individual users and corporations that starts from the point of account opening.

“Yet, users normally do not read disclosures, and many scholars have argued that not reading such terms is actually rational, as whether one reads or not does not really change anything.”

Anyone looking to use a gamified structure for their accounts should read this study and think about whether their design could lead “users into decisions that they might not otherwise make if they were fully informed and exercising genuine free will,” as the authors write.

While I am not completely opposed to the use of these tools, I think they should be deployed with caution and full awareness of the risks.

Maybe instead of focusing on how to make saving more fun, we should focus on how to make it worthwhile. Why would anyone put money in an account only to watch its real value decline? Maybe instead of building a savings game, we need accounts with interest rates higher than inflation rates.

Years ago, I saw a Twitter post that essentially said the growth of things like gambling, meme stocks, and NFTs reflects a societal belief that hard work and saving don’t work anymore. The result is that people, particularly those in younger generations and those who are on the lower rungs of the socioeconomic ladder, feel like only luck and get-rich-quick schemes will improve their position.

The authors of Hooked and Hustled note this, writing the “prevalence of millennial investors on r/WallStreetBets, correlates with their generation’s experience of lagging wealth creation, potentially contributing to their gambling-like, risk-taking behavior and nihilistic approach to financial decisions.”
​
Traditional financial institutions can’t lament the loss of their customers if those same institutions stack the deck against them. 

Privacy is a value that everyone can seemingly agree on, but like many problems, the devil is in the details.

A Look Back: Financial Privacy in 1999

In my own research on the issue, I ran across an interesting article from the last century (1999), that raises some interesting points.

In “Financial Privacy and the Theory of High-Tech Government Surveillance,” author Peter Swire considers the risks that electronic payments pose to privacy vis-à-vis governments.

Sire says his goals are to develop a vocabulary of the problems that come with government access to financial records, while keeping in mind the concern that comes with private companies also having access to personal information.

The Privacy Paradox

Writing in 1999, Swire could not have foreseen the explosion of social media, smartphones, artificial intelligence, and big data mining; however, even without that context, he delivers one of the most important insights in the privacy debate very quickly.

“The paradox is that people seem to have a long-term concern for privacy while making short-term decisions not to respect it.”

Why It Still Matters Today

In my view, the privacy concern needs to extend to both the private and public sectors, particularly in an era when the personal, financial, and political spheres of our lives are increasingly susceptible to digital influence.

Reading Swire’s article with the present in mind helps raise important questions for today’s decision makers.

Government Access and Global Risks

In considering government access to financial records, Swire notes that U.S. companies may face subpoenas for their private financial records from the government.

“For companies operating elsewhere, there may be even fewer legal protections against government access. As financial databases develop in the private sector, there is a corresponding increase in the power of government to track each purchase made by individuals,” he writes.

This reminded me of a meeting the IPA hosted with the FBI, where the Bureau’s experts warned of how the Chinese government has access to all electronic records stored on servers within China’s borders. It is easy to talk about data just being somewhere in “the cloud,” but the location of those servers matters.

Networked Data and Everyday Privacy

Swire also notes how in “an increasingly networked world, the existence of such databases can easily mean that data will spread from one node to another.”
​
Beyond the leaking of data across borders, Swire notes that privacy is not just about illegal things. It can simply be that there are things that you don’t want others to know about – for instance, someone wouldn’t want their employer to know that they are looking at job sites, and businesses don’t want their competitors to know what their employees are researching.

Identity and the Limits of Old Security Measures

In addition, Swire notes that there are bigger problems when personal data can be exposed. “Over time, because mothers’ maiden names and Social Security Numbers are becoming less secure, society will have to develop new methods for establishing identity.” He wrote that in 1999, and here we are over two decades later, still relying on this information in many instances. (Though there is an interesting section where he talks about the Department of Transportation proposing a rule to mandate Social Security numbers on driver’s licenses to make them acceptable for things like boarding a plane. Can you imagine if this had gone into effect?)

From Prediction to Reality

While this paper is a product of its time, the contrast between 1999 and now highlights the need for the financial services industry to devote more thought to what privacy protection should entail in our modern era.

Swire is writing near the beginning of the age of e-commerce, cell phones, and data mining. Many of his concerns – tracking people’s movement through cell phones, identity theft, and data hacks – were either mostly or entirely in the world of imagination.

Looking Ahead: Guardrails for the Future

​Now, though, we can see how his privacy paradox has played out. With bigger, better digital tracking and influencing tools on the horizon, we should work to anticipate how to put up guardrails around our privacy before any more is lost.

Information provided to members by OGR.

​After 40 days, the longest federal government shutdown in U.S. history may finally be nearing its end. A late-night procedural vote in the Senate broke the impasse that has kept much of the federal government closed since early October. Eight senators who caucus with Democrats joined all but one Republican to advance a bipartisan measure that would fund most agencies through Jan. 30, 2026, while passing three full-year appropriations bills and restoring pay for furloughed federal employees.

The agreement marks the first real progress toward reopening the government after weeks of gridlock. Both parties emerge with partial victories and new internal challenges. Republicans secured their goal of reopening the government without preconditions for Affordable Care Act negotiations, while Democrats succeeded in putting healthcare affordability front and center ahead of an election year. Yet both sides face divisions within their own ranks: Republicans over the President’s renewed push to end the filibuster, and Democrats over the balance between moderate and progressive priorities.

Procedurally, the next hurdle is time. Unless senators agree to accelerate the process, final passage could take several days. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), the only Republican to oppose the measure, has signaled that he may object to efforts to fast-track the vote, potentially further delaying the timeline. Meanwhile, the House remains on 36-hour notice to reconvene. 

The stakes are high as the shutdown continues to ripple through the economy and disrupt daily life, particularly in air travel, just weeks before the Thanksgiving holiday. Should Congress move swiftly, federal workers could soon return to their posts under temporary funding that buys lawmakers time to negotiate the remaining 2026 spending bills.

For now, the Senate’s action represents the clearest path yet to reopening the government and to restoring a measure of stability after more than a month of political stalemate.

Don’t miss out.

Join the Innovative Payments Association to access the complete OGR Big Picture and stay informed on the decisions shaping the future of payments.

 The AI compliance environment in financial services is evolving fast, but while the EU moves full steam ahead with clear enforcement mandates, the U.S. landscape remains fragmented and unpredictable. 

From the EU AI Act’s enforcement rollout to mounting pressure from NYDFS, CFPB, and the SEC, the demand for explainable, auditable, and legally defensible AI systems is growing. But here in the U.S., the picture is far less clear, as the second Trump Administration pushes for rapid AI adoption while scaling back federal rulemaking. 

With so much uncertainty ahead, ACI’s Inaugural AI & RegTech in Financial Services Summit is an essential forum for financial institutions to make sense of what’s happening and what’s next. 

IPA’s President & CEO Brian C. Tate will be presenting on Day 2’s session: Cryptocurrency and Stable Coin: Compliance After a Federal Framework. 

Hear from regulators, GCs, compliance officers, and RegTech innovators. Walk away with practical strategies to: 

• Pilot AI under proposed “Innovation Lab” oversight while meeting compliance expectations 

• Adapt to the Trump administration’s AI Action Plan on deregulation and procurement standards 

• Build governance frameworks around explainability, bias auditing, and vendor oversight 

• Use AI in underwriting, fraud, and AML/KYC without triggering enforcement 

• Prepare for cross-border challenges under the EU AI Act 
  
  

Use promo code D10-999-IPA26 at registration to save an additional 10%! 

Full information about the event can be found at: http://bit.ly/4nIuvZQ 
 
Contact Info: 
Contact Name: Katrina Savarino 
Email: [email protected] 
 
### 
A unique organization, American Conference Institute is devoted to providing the business intelligence that senior decision-makers need to respond to challenges both here in the US and around the world.  

Staffed by industry specialists, lawyers and other professionals, American Conference Institute operates as a think-tank, monitoring trends and developments in all major industry sectors, the law, and public policy, with a view to providing information on the leading edge. 

Information provided to members by OGR.

Washington feels like Groundhog Day all over again. The federal government is now entering its fifth week of a shutdown with no resolution in sight. The Senate is back in session and voting, while the House has been out of town for seven straight weeks.

Despite the stalemate, quiet conversations among rank-and-file Senators are showing new signs of life. Some are hopeful that bipartisan cooperation could break the impasse over FY 2026 appropriations. Still, expectations for a breakthrough this week are driven more by timing than optimism.

Behind the headlines, real-world effects are beginning to mount. Missed paychecks and benefit delays are creating pressure on lawmakers to act. The administration’s decision to use emergency funds to cover this week’s SNAP benefits offers only temporary relief. Some Senate appropriators are working to move a package of bipartisan funding bills to reopen parts of the government, while others are floating a longer-term continuing resolution that could last into next year.

Beyond the shutdown drama, the Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments on President Trump’s authority to declare a national emergency and impose tariffs on imported goods—an issue that could have long-term implications for trade, manufacturing, and economic policy.

This is only a snapshot of the week’s developments. IPA members receive the full OGR Big Picture briefing every week, featuring detailed analysis of congressional activity, policy trends, and their implications for the payments and fintech sectors.

Don’t miss out.

Join the Innovative Payments Association to access the complete OGR Big Picture and stay informed on the decisions shaping the future of payments.

The penny is disappearing faster than retailers can cope, but the day after Halloween, I did my part to help out a local grocery chain. 

Pittsburgh-based Giant Eagle Inc. was offering to exchange customers’ pennies for gift cards worth twice the total amount of the pennies they redeemed. So, $100 worth of pennies (the max customers could bring in) would net a $200 gift card.  

It is not the first retailer to take steps to manage the impending penny shortage. According to one news report, Kroger has posted signs asking shoppers to pay with exact change. Convenience store chain Sheetz was offering sodas to customers who brought in 100 pennies, according to the Associated Press.  

So, my wife and I spent part of the morning going through change banks, jars, and cushions to gather up as many pennies as possible.  

Giant Eagle announced its promotion on October 28, and it received plenty of local news coverage. It has more than 200 stores in western Pennsylvania, north Central Ohio, northern West Virginia, Maryland, and Indiana.  
At my local store, a steady line of people – mostly middle-aged and over – waited with boxes, jars, and bags of pennies to be redeemed. No kids showed up to redeem their piggy banks.  

Ahead of me, another penny redeemer asked the clerk why Giant Eagle was doing this. The clerk said the store wanted to avoid being in the position of rounding up or down when it came to purchases or giving out change, because she said it is “highly against the law.” 

It turns out that stores could run afoul of the Supplemental Nutrition Program’s equal treatment provisions that would prevent rounding against or in favor of SNAP recipients, according to a letter from several trade groups representing retailers.  

The store dedicated one cash register and three staffers to the penny drive. Participants would hand their penny containers to the clerks, who would then dump them into plastic cups and weigh them, just like produce at the register. Once the amount was determined, they would load that onto a gift card.  

Some customers would receive gift cards and then head into the store to do shopping. At least one brought all his change and took his nickels, dimes, and quarters over to a Coinstar kiosk to redeem them as well.  

I asked if it had been busy all day, and they said busy was an understatement. One of the team of three weighing pennies said that all the collected pennies would stay at that store, although I imagine some sharing of the penny resources may occur over time.

After going through several change jars and banks, we had 4 pounds and 2.7 ounces of pennies.  

The U.S. Mint says a penny weighs .088 ounces. So, that meant I had about 758 pennies, or about $7.58. That translated into a $15.16 Giant Eagle gift card.  

My gift card was just a small portion of the total. According to CBS News, customers brought in over 100 million pennies and received more than $200 million in gift cards.  ​