| ▲ | colechristensen 19 hours ago | |||||||
The same logic can be used the opposite way, you can, with large amounts of money, manipulate events or people's responses to them. * you can place large bets on events you have influence on the outcome for and make large amounts of money * you can place large bets on events and then threaten people who have influence with a big stick * you can place large bets expecting to lose money in order to change the outcome or a related outcome expecting people to look at the odds and change their behavior And probably lots of other ways. It corrupts events and on a world stage with unethical government in vogue... it's not impossible for people to manipulate a war in order to make bets go their way. | ||||||||
| ▲ | Lerc 19 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||
There was recently a story about a reporter who faced threats because their reporting contained a detail that while not significantly impactful (although about a literal impact) in it's own right changed the win conditions on a prediction bet. I think prediction markets worked as an idea to provide a wisdom of the crowd view when they were being used in good faith, but rewards cause people to prioritise winning and gaming the system pays better than playing fairly. | ||||||||
| ||||||||