We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do • Hacker News Board

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#251

Post by macNchz » Thu, Mar 26, 2026, 9:43 PM UTC

RyanOD wrote: post #184

taurath wrote: post #94

The entire country seems built on taking advantage of people, from my vantage point right now. Whether it’s attention, drugs, or business/legal leverage, everyone is out for advantage and they’re not even pretending to care about people they affect.

Completely agree with this. I watch many commercials on television targeting elderly folks and I just cringe. They seem to be doing everything they can to separate the viewer from their money for a dubious product or service.

Watching over shoulders as elderly people watch YouTube with ads and engage with clips of deepfake celebrities selling fraudulent nonsense is both enlightening and painful.

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#252

Post by yieldcrv » Thu, Mar 26, 2026, 9:44 PM UTC

jakelazaroff wrote: post #74

yieldcrv wrote: post #23

> I don’t think people have thought hard enough about how bad this could get. given that the crypto anarchist papers from the 90s that these markets are built on are very well thought out instruction manuals about how bad it could get, this title implies users are gullible idiots as opposed to the creators and power users An individual's susceptibility to a vice is an individual problem. So I take issue with all the…

> An individual's susceptibility to a vice is an individual problem. Maybe if you're Tom Hanks in Castaway. In real life, people contract lung damage from secondhand smoke; homes are mortgaged to fund gambling habits; families are destroyed by drunk drivers. That's not to say that people can't partake in their vices responsibly. But the idea that any harms are limited to the person with the problem is just not true.

the basis of my view is the observation that homes can be mortgaged to trade financial markets as well

all the protective frameworks out there do not prevent someone from becoming a debt serf or excluded from the credit markets if they want to

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#253

Post by chasd00 » Thu, Mar 26, 2026, 9:45 PM UTC

nlawalker wrote: post #110

jerf wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this scenario, that would be the people paying for the assassination. The people who want it to happen bet that it won't. The people who want to do it bet that it will. The net result is that if one of the people who bet on it happening makes it happen, they are being paid by the people betting against it, in a plausibly deniable way. A country leader seeing someone suddenly take out a $50 million position on them…

What's even more interesting is when you consider that A) it doesn't have to be one person taking out a large position, it can be multiple people, over time, and B) the assassin doesn't have to be known or confirmed ahead of time, if someone decides their "reserve price" has been met, all they have to do to receive a payout is place the appropriate bet before performing the act. The end result is a combination of Kic…

> The end result is a combination of Kickstarter and Doordash for targeted homicide.

or kidnappers. Someone could take the opposite side, kidnap the individual and guarantee their survival for the year. When time is up they just dump them in the street and collect the bet.

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#254

Post by rbbydotdev » Thu, Mar 26, 2026, 9:45 PM UTC

It's tough, because I think outlawing 'vices' like gambling is an infringement on your individual freedom - but when it's done with an enterprise it's so much more problematic. Thinking about for instance tobacco companies vs locally grown in the backyard.

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#255

Post by ymolodtsov » Thu, Mar 26, 2026, 9:45 PM UTC

mrighele wrote: post #247

jackfruitpeel wrote: post #88

The craziest thing here is that online gambling has been legal in the UK and Ireland for many years, and it's been such an obvious negative for those countries — and had been optimized brutally like any other tech product. When I moved over to the US a decade ago, I remember thinking 'well at least they're smart enough to have banned online gambling'. I am very pro personal liberties, but this stuff is weaponized to…

> I'm in senior leadership, and have made it clear that anyone who has worked on these products should not be hired. I appreciate your approach, but I wonder: would you hire somebody with a past in Meta, or ByteDance (to just name two)? They are at least as bad in pushing addiction to people, maybe worse if you think about the scale.

It's a very different kind of addiction.

Working in sports bettings is like working on an online casino.

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#256

Post by skippyboxedhero » Thu, Mar 26, 2026, 9:46 PM UTC

Ferret7446 wrote: post #101

hydroflame7 wrote: post #4

'Predictions' market is the silliest loophole for gambling. Honestly, more surprised Fanduel, DraftKings and the like who have spent millions on lobbying and buying licenses, are not fighting tooth and nail on this.

Actually, prediction markets are closer to stock markets (insofar as you consider stock trading to be gambling). Insider trading is the bigger issue

Insider trading does not (and should not) apply to prediction markets.

When gambling companies make markets on Oscars, for example, they make those markets knowing 100% that people who know the outcome will bet on it. It is inherent to the product, they put protections in place. Equally, with some sports markets (i.e. transfers), they put in place protections to identify activity that IS a legal breach of player's agreements with sports leagues.

But on prediction markets, there is inherent insider knowledge and people should have the sense not to trade on markets where you are trading with insiders. It should be obvious. Financial markets are different, they are supposed to be open. Prediction markets are not.

There has been a strong drive to apply the concept of insider trading. In the UK, people were actually charged under a law intended to protect bookmakers...to be clear, this is happening whilst people close to central bankers and Treasury civil servants are being paid 7 figure sums to leak information, and all the stuff that happens with transfer/TV show markets. As ever, it is only when politics appears that these rules get invented (and to be very clear, politics markets have always had insider action too...it is inherent to the market, bookmakers know this, they did not ask for these people to be charged).

Btw, the Gambling Act has also been used to prevent payments to gamblers who exploited casinos that failed to ensure their games were fair. If you told the people saying "insider trading" that there was a law whose only purpose was to protect casino's margins, they wouldn't lose their mind...these same laws are being used to prevent "insider trading".

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#257

Post by Aurornis » Thu, Mar 26, 2026, 9:46 PM UTC

sjkoelle wrote: post #250

Aurornis wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm in senior leadership, and have made it clear that anyone who has worked on these products should not be hired. I do not like gambling or the prevalence of gambling products, but this is not a good thing for you to do. You should not ban people from your job for reasons that are not relevant to the job you're hiring for. People take jobs for many reasons, including some times simply needing to take the first job…

or even if they are pro-gambling jeez would you never be able to work with someone you disagreed with politically

Having your job eligibility depend on your boss aligning with your personal morals on topics that have nothing to do with work is terrible

I'm surprised there's so much support for this in these HN comments.

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#258

Post by yieldcrv » Thu, Mar 26, 2026, 9:46 PM UTC

dash2 wrote: post #80

yieldcrv wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did read his article, and there are the geopolitical events and the sporting events he talks about. I don't really understand why sports leagues require faith in their institution. Is the economy overleveraged on collateral debt swaps on league merchandise sells? Is our economy built on preteens in Nebraska believing their only way out of there is a worthwhile pursuit? I'm not sure why I am supposed to care about t…

Surely a big point of sport is to get young people to do healthy, character-building team activities. That requires sporting heroes they can look up to, rather than cheats who will throw a game for money.

It doesn’t require that

Representation is a powerful driver for a large swath of humans, there are many others who get inspired for other reasons, or inspired by fictional characters

I’m fine with those other traits being expressed more frequently

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#259

Post by AlexandrB » Thu, Mar 26, 2026, 9:46 PM UTC

edgarvaldes wrote: post #189

Gambling may be bad on its own, but the gambling and advertising combo are a very harmful combination IMHO.

I think the worst part is carrying the two in your pocket at all times. Previously a gambler trying to quit could avoid specific locations. How the hell do you avoid the internet?

Re: We haven't seen the worst of what gambling and prediction markets will do

#260

Post by boelboel » Thu, Mar 26, 2026, 9:47 PM UTC

mrighele wrote: post #247

jackfruitpeel wrote: post #88

The craziest thing here is that online gambling has been legal in the UK and Ireland for many years, and it's been such an obvious negative for those countries — and had been optimized brutally like any other tech product. When I moved over to the US a decade ago, I remember thinking 'well at least they're smart enough to have banned online gambling'. I am very pro personal liberties, but this stuff is weaponized to…

> I'm in senior leadership, and have made it clear that anyone who has worked on these products should not be hired. I appreciate your approach, but I wonder: would you hire somebody with a past in Meta, or ByteDance (to just name two)? They are at least as bad in pushing addiction to people, maybe worse if you think about the scale.

They earn billions from pushing gambling as well, substantial portion of their ads.