Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

White House staff told not to place bets on prediction markets

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 89 posts

Re: White House staff told not to place bets on prediction markets

#51

Post by skippyboxedhero »

Tangurena2 wrote: post #9
mechoblast wrote: post #3

Surely half millions on prediction markets is pennies compared to what is getting made on oil futures/stocks.

It is easier for the SEC to investigate futures, stocks & options. Some of the prediction/gambling markets use crypto and do not participate in "Know Your Customer" regulations.

It is far easier in crypto. It is much more difficult in futures...as the case of a recent repeat Presidential candidate showed.

That will change when people realise crypto isn't anonymous...but that day isn't today.

Re: White House staff told not to place bets on prediction markets

#52

Post by whywhywhywhy »

tdeck wrote: post #44
Havoc wrote: post #5

It’s laughable that it’s even necessary to tell them. Hey don’t abuse privileged workplace information for personal gain isn’t exactly a fresh notion. Imagine if professionals like lawyers and accountants operated like that.

Consider the kind of people who would staff this white house.

It's bipartisan, just look at Pelosi's portfolio.

Re: White House staff told not to place bets on prediction markets

#55

Post by [deleted] »

keviniam wrote: post #18

I don't understand why anybody without access to serious inside information is currently betting on prediction markets. It's clear that insiders are absolutely going to eat your lunch. So who are the suckers who are losing all this money? I guess this isn't true for all things you might bet on, but it seems to be true for a lot of them.

[deleted]

Re: White House staff told not to place bets on prediction markets

#56

Post by OutOfHere »

jeffwask wrote: post #35

Please don't do insider trading. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

For those who live in the red-pilled real world, just don't trade on something where controlling insiders (also with a potential conflict-of-interest) can beat you at the game. This is different from bets with non-controlling insiders with no conflict-of-interest.

Re: White House staff told not to place bets on prediction markets

#57

Post by OutOfHere »

seanalltogether wrote: post #26
keviniam wrote: post #18

I don't understand why anybody without access to serious inside information is currently betting on prediction markets. It's clear that insiders are absolutely going to eat your lunch. So who are the suckers who are losing all this money? I guess this isn't true for all things you might bet on, but it seems to be true for a lot of them.

I remember reading something awhile ago in regards to why people were investing in NFTs when it seemed so clear they were a scam. The gist of it was that it's easy to get into cryptocurrency, but it's hard to get out. KYC, taxes, age requirements, currency fees, etc are enough of a barrier that many people would rather just keep those assets in virtual space. Polymarket is the answer to the question "Well what else a…

That's complete nonsense for the simple reason that it is possible to pay just fine with crypto on various sites, also to buy major gift cards. No KYC applies to these actions. We are not living in 2016.

Re: White House staff told not to place bets on prediction markets

#59

Post by qsera »

namenotrequired wrote: post #53
qsera wrote: post #48

I think the proper thing to do would be to forbid these markets to make bets on stuff that can be won by using only insider information.

Like the stock market?

Mmm..yea. But stock market is not something new, and this possibility always existed.

So I was only thinking about Poloymarket and stuff like that.

Re: White House staff told not to place bets on prediction markets

#60

Post by ajross »

exabrial wrote: post #14

While we’re at it, how about all Congress?

Reasons to treat these situations differently:

1. The executive is doing very obvious insider trading, you can point at exact trades and bets that are clearly being made based on inside info. That's very different than the statistical arguments made about congressional portfolios.

2. Congress isn't privy to the same kind of inside info. Congress will know about changes in government spending with a few weeks to a month or so of lead time. The executive insiders were timing trades down, literally, to the minutes before the start of military action.

Basically that's a terrible whataboutist game you're playing.

Post reply on HN