91–100 of 270 posts
> There are no indications so far that the successful punters have had to return their winnings. However, the data source for Paris’s hottest temperature has since moved to a sensor at the smaller Paris-Le Bourget airport. Here's the negative externality that no one will care about. There's no reason gamblers won't repeat this stunt, until us poor schmucks who just want an accurate temperature reading have to build a…
But why are they only using one sensor?
Building Byzantine fault tolerance into absolutely everything is expensive, and makes everything we do and buy more expensive. It would be better and cheaper to rely on social trust, if that's possible-- and it was possible before these gambling sites. Prediction markets are burning social trust as fuel to make profit, they should be heavily taxed, the way polluters are taxed, as destroyers of the commons.
Even the US Government has executive and legislative officials profiting from secret information they know from doing their duties.
I wonder when someone who does cloud seeding will place a bet about rain at some unlikely time and place.
Or the next large forest fire.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> offshore jurisdictions and uses crypto. This vastly increases the barrier to entry for the normal person though. Is your position that just because laws don't work 100% of the time we shouldn't bother with them?
I didn't say that, you said that.
But wow what a useless way of conversing that is. They asked because it's unclear what you're implying. So could you please clarify if you think regulation would be useful? Or should be done despite being futile? Or shouldn't be done? I can only think of those three answers, is there another?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is it even remotely as destructive as casinos, where the odds are always against you? From a probability perspective Polymarket is much more fair, as you actually have positive expected value if you have an information advantage.
Because Polymarket creates an incentive to change the real-world result. If you create a bet on {person} getting assassinated by {date}, you greatly increase the chances of somebody on the "Yes" side thumbing the scales.
When you put money on the line for events that are influencable, things get dark fast.
Seemingly harmless sports betting is rife with stories about mob members going to extreme lengths to change the outcome of a sporting event.
It's not hard to see how bad a bet like "so and so won't show up to event x" can go. These don't have to be bets about killing or injuring people to result in people being killed or injured to win a bet.
These companies are a pox on society.
I don't understand who is taking the other side of all these insane Polymarket bets. Is Polymarket doing it?
Why is Polymarket legal? I just don't understand.
Why is Polymarket legal? I just don't understand.
Polymarket in particular started out using crypto and off shoring with a "not legal in the US, wink wink" to get try and dodge regulations.