6 ms·

Not just America, everything is. With stock market, at least we can somehow stop the bad actors, insider traders, corporate manipulation, pumps and dumps - with

Not just America, everything is. With stock market, at least we can somehow stop the bad actors, insider traders, corporate manipulation, pumps and dumps - with prediction markets, there is no way. With prediction markets? Next to impossible. The markets being tied to crypto makes it even worse - things get harder to track, jurisdictions get blurry, proving becomes a ping pong between bureaucracy. And proving something becomes moreso a question of free will - if I decided to do X and then someone bets millon dollars on me doing X when odds are low, how do you prove I haven't decided to do X before? Will you prevent me from exercising my free will because of suspect insider trading? What if I am a president/senator? Years ago, I was a kid who discovered online betting - often it was the only time I could place bets on MMA events, especially because it wasn't as popular as it is now. Even then, the gambling sites had "Other" options where you could bet on presidents, popes, landing on mars etc. The new markets aren't that much different, but are just using a nicer way to talk about it. It isn't gambling, it's prediction. You aren't a gambler, you're a "hyperinformed high iq individual predicting the geopolitical moves". Just like crypto gave people the identity crutch of a "tech investor", this gives them the identity crutch of a "geopolitical strategist". But in the end, it is still just gambling - wrapped in a nice ego stroking suit, but gambling none the less.

entropyneur 8mo ago
Stock market integrity is important because of their function in the economy. Scamming of gambling addicts is tragic but not detrimental to society.
- bradhe 8mo ago
  Except when "gambling adicts" end up as a cover for money laundering and funneling cash to people to buy influence.
  - butlike 8mo ago
    People do that with drugs too. I'm not pro gambling, but what's your point?
- kleene_op 8mo ago
  Depends on how many of those gambling addicts there are. If a huge enough portion of the population try to solve the statue quo of their economic problems by betting all on red, that's not gonna be great for society, including those who don't gamble.
- rl3 8mo ago
  >Scamming of gambling addicts is tragic but not detrimental to society. It certainly is at scale.
- anonymous908213 8mo ago
  That is one of the takes I've ever read. There is a reason gambling is so tightly regulated worldwide, and it's certainly not because governments hate easy vice tax revenue. Gambling debt destroys family units, increases poverty rates (most notably for the children of gambling addicts -- the consequences are not localised only to the person making the bad decisions), and increases violent crime rates. Gambling is massively detrimental to society. There can be arguments in allowing people to do things that are detrimental to society in the name of freedom, but it's not a great thing to pretend those detriments don't exist at all.
  - _heimdall 8mo ago
    Do you know of any studies that can accurately show the correlation between gambling and societal costs? On the surface the link makes sense to me and seems like it should be right, though I'm not sure how we could have tested it in a controlled way to really know the link exists.
    - snapcaster 8mo ago
      This is such a weird question, just go outside and interact with humans and the evidence is everywhere
      - deleted 8mo ago
        [deleted]
      - _heimdall 8mo ago
        That's anecdotal, I was curious if there were (well designed) studies that showed likely correlation between the two. I have had family members addicted to drugs and/or alcohol and friends that have been addicted to gambling at various times. I've seen similar reactions anecdotally, but that isn't societal or scientific.
    - BoxFour 8mo ago
      There are a bunch of studies out there [0][1] (two I found immediately) showing the risks around problem gambling, but like with most vices people who’ve already picked the pro side tend to react in the same predictable ways (myself included): 1) Dismissal: Feigning or having a profound misunderstanding of how statistics work by poking at the methodology like “N=200? That’s meaningless.” 2) Apathy: “So what if some people get addicted? We can’t babysit everyone.” 3) Rationalization: “Yeah but it helps Native American reservations, so...” 4) Downplaying: "Ok problem gambling is bad, but how prevalent is problem gambling really?" 0: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1989-05439-001 https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1989-05439-001 1: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32402593/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32402593/
- bsder 8mo ago
  > Scamming of gambling addicts is tragic but not detrimental to society. I used to believe that. With the legalization of all the sports betting and how fast it can drain a gambler which can then affect the gambler's family, I'm now pretty much on the other side of the fence. Just like we banned public smoking because of the effects of secondhand smoke, I'm pretty convinced that the secondary effects of gambling means it needs to go back to being banned. I don't see an obvious way to legislate gambling to prevent the auxiliary victims. It doesn't help that getting maximum profit as a bookie means being part of a group of the scummiest people on the planet who will stoop to anything to drain people of their money as fast as possible.
  - throwaway173738 8mo ago
    The sports betting sites even have account managers who are tasked with keeping people on the sites even after the user has decided to quit. It’s so lucrative they can afford to pay people to sit and text gambling addicts.
    - capncleaver 8mo ago
      This is common practice in gambling and now games, too: Zynga has 'VIP' teams for high-spending free to play game customers, they would talk on the phone at length, get to know them, fly them to Vegas for jaunts, etc. https://www.gamesindustry.biz/how-does-zynga-hunt-for-whales-this-week-in-business https://www.gamesindustry.biz/how-does-zynga-hunt-for-whales... > "We've done so much experimenting at Zynga with VIP. We know what's the frequency of contact. We know what call types work. We know what times to call. We know exactly who to call and when. We know who has a higher propensity to be more susceptible to our call."
      - autoexec 8mo ago
        Video games are massively under-regulated to the point where we've basically got online casinos specifically targeting children. It's so gross.
  - neutronicus 8mo ago
- deleted 8mo ago
  [deleted]
- dns_snek 8mo ago
  Just so we're clear on the standards of solidarity here, someone murdering your entire family would be tragic but not detrimental to society. How much should society do to prevent that from happening?
- ace32229 8mo ago
  You are ignoring the point of TFA. Kalshi & Polymarkets provide a marketplace to monetise political decision-making, a.k.a corruption. This is definitely detrimental to society.
- victorbjorklund 8mo ago
  Until people are making money and affecting the world. Let's say that you're someone close to Trump and you have betted a very large sum that Trump should take a certain action. Are you going to try to make him take that action even if at that point it turns out to be the worst decision for the country and the world?
- nkrisc 8mo ago
  The gambling industry itself is a net drain on society. What is the societal benefit provided by it?
  - jstanley 8mo ago
    Some people want to gamble and the gambling industry provides what they want. How would you like it if people who didn't care about your hobby started questioning the social benefit of allowing you to do it?
    - nkrisc 8mo ago
      > How would you like it if people who didn't care about your hobby started questioning the social benefit of allowing you to do it? In this hypothetical scenario, is my hobby actively harmful to society? Some people would enjoy killing people but we don’t let them do that.
      - jstanley 8mo ago
        Gambling isn't harmful to society. A gambling bet is a private bet between two people. If some people who like gambling are harmful to society in other areas of their life, that's on them.
        vel0city 8mo ago
        Gambling can absolutely destroy lives. I've seen it in my own family. Its highly addictive nature combined with an easy way to lose everything you own is incredibly dangerous. I've personally witnessed domestic violence from a gambler taking heavy losses as they realize they're about to be in a really bad place financially. I've never seen someone get violent over messing up a few rows of knitting.
        jstanley 8mo ago
        So your beef is with domestic violence, not with gambling. In a counterfactual where someone was doing some gambling and not doing some domestic violence, would you be still upset about the gambling in and of itself? Who does it harm?
- nl 8mo ago
  > Scamming of gambling addicts is tragic but not detrimental to society. This isn't true. each 10 per cent increase in gambling expenditure in NSW results in more than 4,500 additional assaults 2,800 additional home break-ins 1,300 additional break and enter (non-dwelling) offences 1,400 additional motor vehicle thefts 2,300 additional stealing from motor vehicle thefts 3,800 additional fraud offences each year https://www.connections.edu.au/news/strong-link-between-gambling-expenditure-and-crime-new-study-finds https://www.connections.edu.au/news/strong-link-between-gamb... > Stock market integrity is important because of their function in the economy Some might argue that people - including gambling addicts, and those impacted by their addiction - might possibly be more important than one of many possible financial mechanisms for free enterprise.
  - moring 8mo ago
    Is that NSW = New South Wales? I'm asking because Wikipedia lists New South Wales as a population of only 8.5 million, and those crime numbers are insanely huge relative to that.
    - rpsw 8mo ago
      The original paper would be: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/add.16648 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/add.16648 The part the article OP linked to would be based off the line: To put these percentage changes in terms of interest to policy makers, a 10% decrease in gambling expenditure in NSW would result in 4579 fewer ASS offences; 2867 fewer BESD offences; 1380 fewer BESND offences; 1398 fewer MVT offences; 2361 fewer SFMV offences; and 3793 fewer FRD offences 2 each year
    - trollbridge 8mo ago
      It is, and some policy proposals have put it forward as the single largest factor of increasing crime.
    - cjs_ac 8mo ago
      More than half of all physical slot machines in the world are in Australia.
- jedimastert 8mo ago
  First of all, anyone getting scammed is detrimental to society because society is made out of people and those are people getting scammed. Gambling addicts are not less important than wealthy people. Second, these markets are generating new gambling addicts, which is wildly and provably detrimental to society.
- sarky-litso 8mo ago
  Have you watched sports recently? Gambling has always had a negative effect on the perceived fairness but once that effect becomes a core part of the way the sport is monetized it gets even worse for everyone involved. Watching playoff games last weekend either Draft Kings or Fan Duel showed an ad where a single person in a crowded bar is cheering wildly by themselves while looking at their parlay bet or whatever on their phone - this isolation of the communal experience alone is a definitely a negative effect but I could go on...
- modriano 8mo ago
  Gambling is frying the brains of a disturbing proportion of genZ and millennial men. It's destroying sports and infecting politics. It's quite detrimental to society.
jbstack 8mo ago
As a matter of adopting sensible definitions, I think you need to draw the line somewhere between what is gambling and what is not. If the risk taken can, in principle, be shifted in your favour (i.e. to produce positive expectation) through application of skill, then it isn't gambling. For example, in my mind, betting on whether you will win a game of chess is not gambling. On the other hand, if you cannot influence the outcome in your favour through skill, then it is gambling. Roulette is generally a good example of this (with the caveat that in some very specific circumstances it's possible to beat with skill). If we're limiting the definition to merely risk-taking (you might win or you might lose) without factoring in skill, then virtually everything in life becomes gambling. For example, you gamble when you deposit money in the bank because it might go bust. There's also the legal definition, in which case it's just a matter of checking whether the jurisdiction you are in considers the activity to be gambling or not.
- evandijk70 8mo ago
  I would say that gambling with skill component is still gambling. For example, in blackjack you can limit your losses by following a basic strategy, which is a 2x2 matrix with rows containing the value of your hand and columns containing the open dealer card. If you can obtain an edge through a skill component (card counting in blackjack), some people wouldn't call this gambling anymore, but I would still call it gambling myself. Someone doing this for a living is a professional gambler. What for me would be a sensible definition is that a bet/gamble has no other goals. Putting money in the bank/investing in a stock reallocates capital, which can be invested by someone. The fact that it is a risk-taking endeavor is merely a side effect. I would say the same goes for selling/buying insurance for your car. So for me, the difference between betting and putting money in the bank/investing is that the primary goal is something different than the risk-taking activity.
  - _heimdall 8mo ago
    Does this not boil down to the distinction being one's intent? I play poker occasionally, for example, and my primary goal is to win money not to take risk. Does that make it meet your definition of investing rather than gambling?
tgsovlerkhgsel 8mo ago
There are some distinctions between gambling and prediction markets. For example, in prediction markets, some forms of insider trading are considered somewhat desirable - essentially, it monetizes insiders leaking inside information. Other forms of insider trading can be problematic: What if someone (could be an individual or even an uncoordinated group) bets millions of dollars on you not doing X, in the hopes of you taking the opposite bet and doing X? The most extreme that I've seen presented so far are markets where people can predict the death date of a person. On the surface, that just seems like a morbid bet. Once you consider the above form of insider trading, you realize that this can act as a reward for someone who can accurately predict the death date of said person, for example because they're making the counter-trade from a phone next to a high-powered rifle on the rooftop across the street - and like in the bribe example above, the people on the "losing" side of the bet might not mind too much. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_market https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_market
- TeMPOraL 8mo ago
  > What if someone (could be an individual or even an uncoordinated group) bets millions of dollars on you not doing X, in the hopes of you taking the opposite bet and doing X? From their POV, that's the purest form of voting with money. If you do X, they're presumably happy with the outcome they just paid for; if you do the opposite of X, they at least have their payouts as consolation prize.
- ToValueFunfetti 8mo ago
  >What if someone (could be an individual or even an uncoordinated group) bets millions of dollars on you not doing X, in the hopes of you taking the opposite bet and doing X? If the market is efficient and aware of the bribery effect, others will bet that you will do X up to the point where the indirect bribe is equal to the cost of you doing X. If you have private knowledge that a bribe would be taken, you probably have the access to do it far cheaper off market (and you can still use crypto).
  - suddenlybananas 8mo ago
    >If the market is efficient If my grandmother had wheels she'd be a bike
deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]
alphazard 8mo ago
If only there was some sort of way to see if a given market participant's behavior was best explained as a "high iq individual predicting geopolitical moves" vs. "just gambling". Maybe a number of some kind?
KellyCriterion 8mo ago
>You aren't a gambler, you're a "hyperinformed high iq individual predicting the geopolitical moves" And finally, here it is: The one guy who won the Venezuela bet by being hyperinformed-high-iq-predicting-the-future: https://futurism.com/future-society/polymarket-venezuela-insider-trading https://futurism.com/future-society/polymarket-venezuela-ins... (btw: you forgot to add AI and blockchain!)
lenerdenator 8mo ago
To be fair, if you were aware enough to separate the characteristics of wealth and intelligence, you've probably seen the investing world as a casino with ego-stroking suits long before this. The difference between the cigarette-burning retiree surrendering their OASDI check at a casino in Kansas City and Wall Street investors is a diploma from the "right" schools and in the ability to sway the odds in their favor; they both can - and will - destroy themselves or those around them to indulge in their habit. Any sort of announced intention to "somehow stop the bad actors" became laughable after 2008-2009. We had bankers and financiers kick the monetary legs out from under an entire generation and unless they did something blatantly illegal (read: were Bernie Madoff) none of them faced a consequence. That's why you have the current situation in the US where scammers can take advantage of distrust in any and all of society's institutions, up to and including the federal government.
Der_Einzige 8mo ago
You wrote this post with AI.
- whattheheckheck 8mo ago
  Someone's ai classifier bot posted again

entropyneur 8mo ago

Stock market integrity is important because of their function in the economy. Scamming of gambling addicts is tragic but not detrimental to society.

bradhe 8mo ago
Except when "gambling adicts" end up as a cover for money laundering and funneling cash to people to buy influence.
- butlike 8mo ago
  People do that with drugs too. I'm not pro gambling, but what's your point?
kleene_op 8mo ago
Depends on how many of those gambling addicts there are. If a huge enough portion of the population try to solve the statue quo of their economic problems by betting all on red, that's not gonna be great for society, including those who don't gamble.
rl3 8mo ago
>Scamming of gambling addicts is tragic but not detrimental to society. It certainly is at scale.
anonymous908213 8mo ago
That is one of the takes I've ever read. There is a reason gambling is so tightly regulated worldwide, and it's certainly not because governments hate easy vice tax revenue. Gambling debt destroys family units, increases poverty rates (most notably for the children of gambling addicts -- the consequences are not localised only to the person making the bad decisions), and increases violent crime rates. Gambling is massively detrimental to society. There can be arguments in allowing people to do things that are detrimental to society in the name of freedom, but it's not a great thing to pretend those detriments don't exist at all.
- _heimdall 8mo ago
  Do you know of any studies that can accurately show the correlation between gambling and societal costs? On the surface the link makes sense to me and seems like it should be right, though I'm not sure how we could have tested it in a controlled way to really know the link exists.
  - snapcaster 8mo ago
    This is such a weird question, just go outside and interact with humans and the evidence is everywhere
    - deleted 8mo ago
      [deleted]
    - _heimdall 8mo ago
      That's anecdotal, I was curious if there were (well designed) studies that showed likely correlation between the two. I have had family members addicted to drugs and/or alcohol and friends that have been addicted to gambling at various times. I've seen similar reactions anecdotally, but that isn't societal or scientific.
  - BoxFour 8mo ago
    There are a bunch of studies out there [0][1] (two I found immediately) showing the risks around problem gambling, but like with most vices people who’ve already picked the pro side tend to react in the same predictable ways (myself included): 1) Dismissal: Feigning or having a profound misunderstanding of how statistics work by poking at the methodology like “N=200? That’s meaningless.” 2) Apathy: “So what if some people get addicted? We can’t babysit everyone.” 3) Rationalization: “Yeah but it helps Native American reservations, so...” 4) Downplaying: "Ok problem gambling is bad, but how prevalent is problem gambling really?" 0: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1989-05439-001 https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1989-05439-001 1: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32402593/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32402593/
bsder 8mo ago
> Scamming of gambling addicts is tragic but not detrimental to society. I used to believe that. With the legalization of all the sports betting and how fast it can drain a gambler which can then affect the gambler's family, I'm now pretty much on the other side of the fence. Just like we banned public smoking because of the effects of secondhand smoke, I'm pretty convinced that the secondary effects of gambling means it needs to go back to being banned. I don't see an obvious way to legislate gambling to prevent the auxiliary victims. It doesn't help that getting maximum profit as a bookie means being part of a group of the scummiest people on the planet who will stoop to anything to drain people of their money as fast as possible.
- throwaway173738 8mo ago
  The sports betting sites even have account managers who are tasked with keeping people on the sites even after the user has decided to quit. It’s so lucrative they can afford to pay people to sit and text gambling addicts.
  - capncleaver 8mo ago
    This is common practice in gambling and now games, too: Zynga has 'VIP' teams for high-spending free to play game customers, they would talk on the phone at length, get to know them, fly them to Vegas for jaunts, etc. https://www.gamesindustry.biz/how-does-zynga-hunt-for-whales-this-week-in-business https://www.gamesindustry.biz/how-does-zynga-hunt-for-whales... > "We've done so much experimenting at Zynga with VIP. We know what's the frequency of contact. We know what call types work. We know what times to call. We know exactly who to call and when. We know who has a higher propensity to be more susceptible to our call."
    - autoexec 8mo ago
      Video games are massively under-regulated to the point where we've basically got online casinos specifically targeting children. It's so gross.
- neutronicus 8mo ago
deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]
dns_snek 8mo ago
Just so we're clear on the standards of solidarity here, someone murdering your entire family would be tragic but not detrimental to society. How much should society do to prevent that from happening?
ace32229 8mo ago
You are ignoring the point of TFA. Kalshi & Polymarkets provide a marketplace to monetise political decision-making, a.k.a corruption. This is definitely detrimental to society.
victorbjorklund 8mo ago
Until people are making money and affecting the world. Let's say that you're someone close to Trump and you have betted a very large sum that Trump should take a certain action. Are you going to try to make him take that action even if at that point it turns out to be the worst decision for the country and the world?
nkrisc 8mo ago
The gambling industry itself is a net drain on society. What is the societal benefit provided by it?
- jstanley 8mo ago
  Some people want to gamble and the gambling industry provides what they want. How would you like it if people who didn't care about your hobby started questioning the social benefit of allowing you to do it?
  - nkrisc 8mo ago
    > How would you like it if people who didn't care about your hobby started questioning the social benefit of allowing you to do it? In this hypothetical scenario, is my hobby actively harmful to society? Some people would enjoy killing people but we don’t let them do that.
    - jstanley 8mo ago
      Gambling isn't harmful to society. A gambling bet is a private bet between two people. If some people who like gambling are harmful to society in other areas of their life, that's on them.
      - vel0city 8mo ago
        Gambling can absolutely destroy lives. I've seen it in my own family. Its highly addictive nature combined with an easy way to lose everything you own is incredibly dangerous. I've personally witnessed domestic violence from a gambler taking heavy losses as they realize they're about to be in a really bad place financially. I've never seen someone get violent over messing up a few rows of knitting.
        jstanley 8mo ago
        So your beef is with domestic violence, not with gambling. In a counterfactual where someone was doing some gambling and not doing some domestic violence, would you be still upset about the gambling in and of itself? Who does it harm?
nl 8mo ago
> Scamming of gambling addicts is tragic but not detrimental to society. This isn't true. each 10 per cent increase in gambling expenditure in NSW results in more than 4,500 additional assaults 2,800 additional home break-ins 1,300 additional break and enter (non-dwelling) offences 1,400 additional motor vehicle thefts 2,300 additional stealing from motor vehicle thefts 3,800 additional fraud offences each year https://www.connections.edu.au/news/strong-link-between-gambling-expenditure-and-crime-new-study-finds https://www.connections.edu.au/news/strong-link-between-gamb... > Stock market integrity is important because of their function in the economy Some might argue that people - including gambling addicts, and those impacted by their addiction - might possibly be more important than one of many possible financial mechanisms for free enterprise.
- moring 8mo ago
  Is that NSW = New South Wales? I'm asking because Wikipedia lists New South Wales as a population of only 8.5 million, and those crime numbers are insanely huge relative to that.
  - rpsw 8mo ago
    The original paper would be: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/add.16648 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/add.16648 The part the article OP linked to would be based off the line: To put these percentage changes in terms of interest to policy makers, a 10% decrease in gambling expenditure in NSW would result in 4579 fewer ASS offences; 2867 fewer BESD offences; 1380 fewer BESND offences; 1398 fewer MVT offences; 2361 fewer SFMV offences; and 3793 fewer FRD offences 2 each year
  - trollbridge 8mo ago
    It is, and some policy proposals have put it forward as the single largest factor of increasing crime.
  - cjs_ac 8mo ago
    More than half of all physical slot machines in the world are in Australia.
jedimastert 8mo ago
First of all, anyone getting scammed is detrimental to society because society is made out of people and those are people getting scammed. Gambling addicts are not less important than wealthy people. Second, these markets are generating new gambling addicts, which is wildly and provably detrimental to society.
sarky-litso 8mo ago
Have you watched sports recently? Gambling has always had a negative effect on the perceived fairness but once that effect becomes a core part of the way the sport is monetized it gets even worse for everyone involved. Watching playoff games last weekend either Draft Kings or Fan Duel showed an ad where a single person in a crowded bar is cheering wildly by themselves while looking at their parlay bet or whatever on their phone - this isolation of the communal experience alone is a definitely a negative effect but I could go on...
modriano 8mo ago
Gambling is frying the brains of a disturbing proportion of genZ and millennial men. It's destroying sports and infecting politics. It's quite detrimental to society.

jbstack 8mo ago

As a matter of adopting sensible definitions, I think you need to draw the line somewhere between what is gambling and what is not. If the risk taken can, in principle, be shifted in your favour (i.e. to produce positive expectation) through application of skill, then it isn't gambling. For example, in my mind, betting on whether you will win a game of chess is not gambling. On the other hand, if you cannot influence the outcome in your favour through skill, then it is gambling. Roulette is generally a good example of this (with the caveat that in some very specific circumstances it's possible to beat with skill). If we're limiting the definition to merely risk-taking (you might win or you might lose) without factoring in skill, then virtually everything in life becomes gambling. For example, you gamble when you deposit money in the bank because it might go bust. There's also the legal definition, in which case it's just a matter of checking whether the jurisdiction you are in considers the activity to be gambling or not.

evandijk70 8mo ago
I would say that gambling with skill component is still gambling. For example, in blackjack you can limit your losses by following a basic strategy, which is a 2x2 matrix with rows containing the value of your hand and columns containing the open dealer card. If you can obtain an edge through a skill component (card counting in blackjack), some people wouldn't call this gambling anymore, but I would still call it gambling myself. Someone doing this for a living is a professional gambler. What for me would be a sensible definition is that a bet/gamble has no other goals. Putting money in the bank/investing in a stock reallocates capital, which can be invested by someone. The fact that it is a risk-taking endeavor is merely a side effect. I would say the same goes for selling/buying insurance for your car. So for me, the difference between betting and putting money in the bank/investing is that the primary goal is something different than the risk-taking activity.
- _heimdall 8mo ago
  Does this not boil down to the distinction being one's intent? I play poker occasionally, for example, and my primary goal is to win money not to take risk. Does that make it meet your definition of investing rather than gambling?

tgsovlerkhgsel 8mo ago

There are some distinctions between gambling and prediction markets. For example, in prediction markets, some forms of insider trading are considered somewhat desirable - essentially, it monetizes insiders leaking inside information. Other forms of insider trading can be problematic: What if someone (could be an individual or even an uncoordinated group) bets millions of dollars on you not doing X, in the hopes of you taking the opposite bet and doing X? The most extreme that I've seen presented so far are markets where people can predict the death date of a person. On the surface, that just seems like a morbid bet. Once you consider the above form of insider trading, you realize that this can act as a reward for someone who can accurately predict the death date of said person, for example because they're making the counter-trade from a phone next to a high-powered rifle on the rooftop across the street - and like in the bribe example above, the people on the "losing" side of the bet might not mind too much. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_market https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_market

TeMPOraL 8mo ago
> What if someone (could be an individual or even an uncoordinated group) bets millions of dollars on you not doing X, in the hopes of you taking the opposite bet and doing X? From their POV, that's the purest form of voting with money. If you do X, they're presumably happy with the outcome they just paid for; if you do the opposite of X, they at least have their payouts as consolation prize.
ToValueFunfetti 8mo ago
>What if someone (could be an individual or even an uncoordinated group) bets millions of dollars on you not doing X, in the hopes of you taking the opposite bet and doing X? If the market is efficient and aware of the bribery effect, others will bet that you will do X up to the point where the indirect bribe is equal to the cost of you doing X. If you have private knowledge that a bribe would be taken, you probably have the access to do it far cheaper off market (and you can still use crypto).
- suddenlybananas 8mo ago
  >If the market is efficient If my grandmother had wheels she'd be a bike

deleted 8mo ago

[deleted]

alphazard 8mo ago

If only there was some sort of way to see if a given market participant's behavior was best explained as a "high iq individual predicting geopolitical moves" vs. "just gambling". Maybe a number of some kind?

KellyCriterion 8mo ago

>You aren't a gambler, you're a "hyperinformed high iq individual predicting the geopolitical moves" And finally, here it is: The one guy who won the Venezuela bet by being hyperinformed-high-iq-predicting-the-future: https://futurism.com/future-society/polymarket-venezuela-insider-trading https://futurism.com/future-society/polymarket-venezuela-ins... (btw: you forgot to add AI and blockchain!)

lenerdenator 8mo ago

To be fair, if you were aware enough to separate the characteristics of wealth and intelligence, you've probably seen the investing world as a casino with ego-stroking suits long before this. The difference between the cigarette-burning retiree surrendering their OASDI check at a casino in Kansas City and Wall Street investors is a diploma from the "right" schools and in the ability to sway the odds in their favor; they both can - and will - destroy themselves or those around them to indulge in their habit. Any sort of announced intention to "somehow stop the bad actors" became laughable after 2008-2009. We had bankers and financiers kick the monetary legs out from under an entire generation and unless they did something blatantly illegal (read: were Bernie Madoff) none of them faced a consequence. That's why you have the current situation in the US where scammers can take advantage of distrust in any and all of society's institutions, up to and including the federal government.

Der_Einzige 8mo ago

You wrote this post with AI.

whattheheckheck 8mo ago
Someone's ai classifier bot posted again