If insiders trade, the market becomes more accurate, which is good for society. Like WikiLeaks. Thus the MSN panic, the legacy establishment wants Polymarket to follow Assange's path.

That sounds a lot like "the magical hand of the markets" and "trickle down economics". A hope surrounded by a semblance of logic but not a lot thought put on the important details of how things actually work.

With this I mean: I can think of several ways in which this would go in the other direction (bad for society). And I am not an economics expert.

The problem discussed in the article was NOT insiders trading on secret information — it is the nearly opposite problem of manipulators trading and skewing the odds.

Insider trading seeks to trade with secret information and minimally obvious trades to avoid moving the markets until their position is locked in, in order to profit when the previously secret information becomes public and the market finally moves to a different price level.

Manipulators seek to move the market to create a false narrative that market-moving info exists when actual market-moving does NOT exist; the expectation is that people will see the price change and ASSUME there is information behind it, when there is actually just a manipulator willing to lose money to create that impression.

In a small market, such manipulation can be more cost-effective (make more of an impression for the same cost) vs buying advertisements.

Yep, some WH member trading 400k$ an hour before an attack sure did wonders for "the good of society". So does media showing rates on gambling websites as if they were an oracle and not something that can be gamed for cheaper than a TV ad.

For fucks sake...