That's not how it works.

First, you have inside traders. Then, among legitimate bettors, you have smart people using multiple data sources (not just the "news") and doing sophisticated analysis that most journalists cannot do, and are not motivated to do -- again, because their incentives are different.

▲

vasco 2 days ago | parent [-]

Smart people cannot predict things by 'research'. "Will the US strike Iran by X date" going from 20% likelihood to 80%+ within hours points simply to insiders.

You can do research to know the US would strike, there's no other point in moving multiple carriers over to somewhere. But exactly WHEN is not researchable. This applies to most other bets. So lets stop pretending there's anything more than 2 cohorts, insiders and degenerate gamblers.

▲

TheCowboy a day ago | parent | next [-]

It's an empirical fact that smart people can predict things by doing research. See Tetlock's book Superforecasting.

I've been doing it profitably myself for almost 10 years now. I have zero special inside knowledge, and no access to any other non-public information.

> Will the US strike Iran by X date

Last year I did think the market for a strike on Iran was significantly underpriced given the information and conditions within a specific frame of time.

I don't think every smart person can just pop into prediction markets and print money, but I know many smart people who are long-term winners. I also don't try to knock people as degenerate when they have genuine talent.

	▲	vasco 13 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You haven't been profitable for 10 years on prediction markets and you being profitable doesn't mean anything in regards to insiders or the rigging of a market.

▲

thetailrisk a day ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]