Can someone explain to me how we haven’t regulated the hell out of the clearly illegal sector of betting on shit that can clearly be insider-traded with little to no scrutiny?

Leaders? Are you awake at the wheel?

▲

baq 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Who do you think places those bets

▲

ed_elliott_asc 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Does it need to be regulated? This isn’t pension funds placing bets risking people’s investment money.

People using Polymarket are gambling on pretty random things and must understand the risk , whether it is on major geopolitical events or someone counting cars going through a junction these events can all be manipulated pretty easily.

People want to gamble on random things? Let them.

If anything is regulate the other side, people in government can’t use sites like polymarket because I don’t want them making stupid decisions so bets fall one side or another.

	▲	chii an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I think making the bets not anonymous is sufficient imho. If a gov't official (including the president) is leaking classified information, there's already laws about that isnt there? (Whether it's effective is another question - i'm assuming it's currently effective).

▲

razorbeamz 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The leaders are the ones profiting from it.

▲

eli_gottlieb 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Because they're the ones doing it and they have the power? Sorta inevitable outcome of markets in everything, really.

▲

fontain 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I mean... insiders are betting on war crimes. Yes, the insider betting is bad but it doesn't even touch the edges compared to committing war crimes. And if the government is committing war crimes, why would they care about something so inconsequential as betting on them?

▲

spencerflem 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They’re the ones doing it lol

▲

tasuki 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I wanted to reply, but I think I just don't understand your comment at all.

Are you saying the "sector of betting on shit that can clearly be insider-traded" is illegal? Does that include like gold and S&P500?

The way I see it, prediction markets' main function is to connect gamblers with insiders posessing useful information. Are you concerned for the gamblers losing? But they were gonna lose anyway, one way or the other. Or are you concerned about the insiders winning? Sucks, but at least the public gets information by way of the prediction market being more accurate.

▲

mullingitover 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Are you concerned for the gamblers losing?

I’m concerned about people with addictions being exploited by greedy degenerates who don’t care about the negative externalities with which they’re burdening our society, yes.

	▲	tasuki 23 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Do you propose to make all addictive endeavours illegal? Ban porn? It might actually be a good idea in theory, but I doubt it'd work in practice, who knows.

▲

mint5 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Please Explain how a last minute insider info bet helps the public in any way or fashion aside from fleecing fools of their money?

▲

baq 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Nobody is forcing anybody to place the bets, but if you see credible money flows into eg. Middle East cease fire bets, you can decide to fill up your tank today, or not. We can’t think for you here, if you don’t see anything useful in the price then it’s time to educate yourself until you do. You should consider these bets more trustworthy than any news you read in mainstream media. There might even be a way to fund journalism here, though ethics are quite muddy indeed.

▲

GuestFAUniverse 2 hours ago | parent [-]

And what makes you believe that those (basically) peanuts that get bet are the real indicators?

The insiders might as well run a backroom prediction market and just manipulate the public market.

And even with bigger sums: you never know if it isn't just a variant of the shell game. There are no real signals.

	▲	baq an hour ago \| parent [-]
		It's a fallacy to think all insiders are big players. Small fish want a piece, too, and are not constrained in the same ways the big ones are.