Remix.run Logo
bertil 2 hours ago

I'm very tempted to agree that those markets are not providing a positive force, given the focus on questions for which a small group of people know the answer ahead of time. They are not sharing that information because it is not in their interest, and insiders likely won’t have a great time for long.

However, there is large value for some people in knowing when a country will be invaded: if you live there, you know when to leave; if you are an airline, when to stop scheduling flights there, or, if a lot of people are in the first group, up until when to schedule many more flights to get them out. But I’m positive the invading army would prefer some kid in a basement didn’t make one Lieutenant General on the committee obscenely rich overnight.

I wished the focused on markets where many people are part of the decision, like elections. There, the wisdom of the crowds would add some value.

yunohn 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> there is large value for some people in knowing when a country will be invaded

Are there any examples of people/companies trusting degenerate gamblers on prediction markets and making real life-changing decisions?

All the examples I’ve seen are exactly what I started in my original post - the insider circle opening a massive position on the right invasion date mere minutes/hours before they actually do it. This is useful to precisely nobody! And it happens because they are insiders, who want to avoid risk of exposure. Not to share their godly wisdom with the world for others benefit.

FergusArgyll 30 minutes ago | parent [-]

> Are there any examples of people/companies trusting degenerate gamblers on prediction markets and making real life-changing decisions?

If "real life-changing decisions" includes deciding to take a flight based on polymarket placing a low price on war breaking out, then yes.

I'd also challenge you to outperform "Degenerate gamblers"