Remix.run Logo
slg 4 hours ago

Say whatever you want about the merits of prediction markets. But I just don't see a way those benefits outweigh the societal dangers of these constant reminders that people in or close to power can freely profit from their positions in the ways the rest of the population can't. There's always talk about the dangers of disincentivizing job creators, but what happens when a society routinely disincentives job havers in this way? We're just getting a constant barrage of information telling us that if we show up to our job and simply work as we're expected that we're stooges who won't get ahead. You'll need to look for your own individual scheme, ethics be damned, if you just want to keep up with the rest of the population. That's not healthy on an individual level or cumulatively at a societal level.

jaredklewis 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The current setup does sort of seem like a tax on being stupid. Why would any non-insider participate in these markets? You’re just asking to get screwed.

Though it’s not that different from the stock market, where the folks at WSB happily give their money to Citadel, Jane Street, and friends, because every once a while, one of them hits it big after going all in that the ball lands on green.

Gambling is a hell of a drug and there are good reasons why it is illegal in so many places. Prediction markets have some good externalities (information), but it’s another addictive outlet for those vulnerable to gambling addiction.

lostlogin 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> The current setup does sort of seem like a tax on being stupid.

More like a tax on being ethical or having any morality.

2 hours ago | parent | next [-]
[deleted]
jaredklewis an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

What is unethical?

The good point of prediction markets is that they provide information. This information is available to everyone, for free, which benefits everyone.

Insiders help achieve this. Insiders have information and by participating in the market they then expose and share that information. So this is good. If we ban insiders, we're just banning accurate information from getting into the market. If we do that, we might as well just ban prediction markets altogether. I don't have a strong opinion either way on that, but a prediction market without insiders is pointless.

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

>Why would any non-insider participate in these markets?

Because they are grossly mis-priced for anyone mildly informed.

direwolf20 an hour ago | parent [-]

Did you get rich off these markets? If not, how can you say it's true?

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

As a hedge. Say you own real estate in UAE, and you note that insurance does not cover acts of war. Betting on something like "Iran Bombs Dubai" creates some form of real estate insurance for you.

Even if you suppose my example is bad, you should be able to envision some case where such hedge is helpful.

MadnessASAP 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Yes, but the examples where it's good has a name "insurance". It exists, it's generally well regulated, and is not easily exploited.

The reason it works better is because in a prediction market, the person betting against you has no resources or ability to go after you for fraudulent behavior. Whereas an insurance company has both.

amelius 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Why not get a real insurance, where it is actually verified that your house was bombed?

crazygringo 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Because there are many things where insurance doesn't exist.

amelius 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Ok let's work on that then. But meanwhile, close down unregulated websites like polymarket, where there is no verification of actual damage.

crazygringo 3 hours ago | parent [-]

You can't just "work on that".

Insurance works on repeatable, predictable risks based on models.

You can't get insurance against a military attack. But you can hedge using a prediction market. It's essentially the version of insurance for one-off events, that relies on wagers since you can't use models.

3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]
mothballed 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm not saying it's not out there, but in many cases finding insurance for act of war is difficult. It is certainly rare and almost always far less accessible than using polymarket. If you have a very large holding you can probably get someone to write it for you though.

direwolf20 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> Why would any non-insider participate in these markets? You’re just asking to get screwed.

If people who do the obvious trades (sell oil right now - it's going down) lose money, all you have to do is do the opposite (buy oil right now - it's going down) and gain money. Is it not that simple? You will profit along with the insiders when Trump blockades the strait again, although you won't have such perfect timing.

H8crilA 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The oil trade structure actually does make sense, because this is how you buy oil, or really any commodity that takes so much space and weight. You order it ahead of time, then if you hold till the contract settles you are allowed to pick it up from the place and in the way designated in the contract specification. In fact you are obliged to pick it up, that's why prices can go negative in exceptional situations. Prediction markets are then just a clean cash-only derivative.

Most of the other prediction markets seems rather stupid to me (they are completely detached from any real world activity), other than their prices being a fairly reliable source of information for bystanders.

slg 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

>The oil trade structure actually does make sense, because this is how you buy oil, or really any commodity that takes so much space and weight. You order it ahead of time, then if you hold till the contract settles you are allowed to pick it up from the place and in the way designated in the contract specification. In fact you are obliged to pick it up, that's why prices can go negative in exceptional situations. Prediction markets are then just a clean cash-only derivative.

You just described what is happening, you didn't actually provide any reason for why this is good for anyone but the individuals profiting from it.

nine_k 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The point is that's a dubious derivative of a market that makes sense.

As usual, it's a tax on naive and those who get addicted; the twist is that they are willing to pay it, demand and beg to pay it, so providers spring up, legal or not.

Tade0 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Airlines in particular prefer to have a predictable price of fuel, whatever it might be, so they buy futures.

lesuorac 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Do they? Afaik, they don't [1].

> WONG: However, Gerry says most of the major airlines in the U.S. eventually soured on fuel hedging. One reason - the Wall Street transaction fees to make these hedges got expensive.

> WOODS: Plus, Gerry says the airlines found that they could make money the old-fashioned way by raising prices. Today, none of the major airlines in the U.S. are hedging.

Hedging is one of those things that sounds cool but then when your service is x% more expensive than a competitor and you lose customers you just stop doing it. It's kinda like being on AWS; when everybody has an outage together nobody asks "oh what can be done differently".

[1]: https://www.npr.org/2026/03/27/nx-s1-5759203/fuel-hedging-on...

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

Is there a name for the phenomenon of when someone provides a single explanation that is so inconsequential that it ends up being counterproductive because surely they would have given a better explanation if one existed?

If your go-to reasoning for why we need prediction markets is so airlines can have more predictability in their fuel costs, you're inadvertently making a solid argument that we don't actually need prediction markets. And this isn't even getting into the other ways these airlines could satisfy the same need.

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

That still does not satisfactorily answer the question though, why don't they just sign a purchase order with N month lead time? That still gives a well defined price ahead of time.

nine_k 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

But that's literally what a "future" is.

strulovich 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The people who need the constant price do that, but creating this contract generates an investment at the same time. The person promising the price is taking a premium to take the risk, they can the sell that risk in a free market.

direwolf20 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

tyre 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

are you saying that the people trading on inside information about military operations are… producers hedging exposure?

colechristensen 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think the bigger risk is changing major decisions (like war) based on the profitability of bets. Forget about drone war doctrine, if you're an adversary just place absurdly large bets which incentivize the opposition to do what you want. (i.e. bet so you "lose" the bet when the enemy changes their posture to gain the profit).

Politics is already full of these pay to play incentives but now anyone with enough cash can influence world events.

SJMG 3 hours ago | parent [-]

This kind of nation-level hedging has been talked about for years in betting market-aware communities. It's honestly a much better use than fleecing nobodies with insider knowledge.

stubish 2 hours ago | parent [-]

We should be more worried about who placed the losing bets then. Russia, Israel and China having a market for government and military officials to accept their bribes is kind of a bigger story than insiders fleecing gamblers.

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

> Say whatever you want about the merits of prediction markets

Go on, I'll wait for those "merits"

boringg 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Lining the pockets of the vcs who funded them and the other insiders. Nothing but an extractionary industry with no underlying benefit.

austhrow743 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

More accurate information about the world allows for more effective decision making.

airstrike 24 minutes ago | parent [-]

If people are insider trading so blatantly, there's no "more accurate information" here until it's too late and it's already news. You're just getting scammed

easterncalculus an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> That's not healthy on an individual level or cumulatively at a societal level.

This is a product of a secular neoliberal culture (certainly including this website) that there is no 'society', really, or at least nothing that's BAD for society - effectively the same thing. If profit is king above all else, there's nothing wrong with vice, with scams, anything to chase the bag. It used to be that neoliberals understood community, but even suggesting that the health of society exists is considered reactionary now.

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

what you’re describing kind of sounds like the wild west or the settlers frontier or the Industrial Revolution, all things that were actually quite beneficial, however in our current environment where everything has been regulated and captured by corporate lobbied legal machinery it’s much worse to have heavy restriction on the masses with the monied upper class able to grease the wheels, if we’re going to have the freedom we need to boom a healthy economy for everyone we need far more wild west from top to bottom

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

As a foreigner, some view making business with the US as shady in of itself. I usually stand by the US legal system, (which even american citizens might find laughable), but this is by far the most likely reason I would distance myself from doing business.

It helps that some states are bringing criminal charges vs these companies. But it looks like a no contest as to how we'll look back to these kinds of things in 5 years.

Betting on war is war, you may argue that it's an individual's right to participate in war, (I don't think so, I think that it's a war crime for unmarked civilians to participate in war), but funding bellicose action is war.

Buttons840 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]