Live data from Hacker News

Google employee charged with $1M Polymarket insider trading bet on search term

cnbc.com

51–60 of 234 posts

Re: Google employee charged with $1M Polymarket insider trading bet on search term

#51

So now the real bet he lost is salary + time for all those years he is going to prision + lower job for decades after prison. This person bet Millions to get $1M basically and lost both, very rare gambling level lost from smart(used to) person. At least normal gambler loses what they have and some debt.

You're making a bold assumption that this is the first time they're making money off of these bets.

Re: Google employee charged with $1M Polymarket insider trading bet on search term

#52
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's sort of the point of prediction markets: they surface insider information by allowing people to profit off of it. The benefit is to people watching the prices , who can then use that information to make better decisions ahead of the answer being revealed to the public. It's not necessarily to market participants, who need to be aware of who else is trading the market and have a credible reason to believe they…

It barely makes sense, though? The idea is that it will surface insider information to the public. That happens only because the insider is financially incentivized to place a bet. But they will only bet if they can win money, and they can only win money if someone is taking the other side of their bet, which necessarily means someone without their insider information. In other words, prediction markets require sucke…

People with insider information often aren't necessarily aware they even have it. "Superforecasters" are often just "good at predicting" moves within a given vertical, because they have expertise and exposure to the trends of that vertical, and are good at making deductions and extrapolating trends. Those people make money from prediction markets just as often as people with true insider info do.

And the people they're both making money from, are people who think they have enough expertise + exposure to function as superforecasters — and who probably could function as superforecasters, in a market with fewer "sharks" in the pool — but who lose out simply because they were slightly less well-calibrated than whoever they were trading with.

Which is to say: prediction markets can still work and be worthwhile to participate in, even if everyone in them is rational. They don't require suckers.

But, in practice, they certainly do seem to attract them.

Re: Google employee charged with $1M Polymarket insider trading bet on search term

#53
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's sort of the point of prediction markets: they surface insider information by allowing people to profit off of it. The benefit is to people watching the prices , who can then use that information to make better decisions ahead of the answer being revealed to the public. It's not necessarily to market participants, who need to be aware of who else is trading the market and have a credible reason to believe they…

It barely makes sense, though? The idea is that it will surface insider information to the public. That happens only because the insider is financially incentivized to place a bet. But they will only bet if they can win money, and they can only win money if someone is taking the other side of their bet, which necessarily means someone without their insider information. In other words, prediction markets require sucke…

Disclaimer: I have not read any literature on the economics of prediction markets, and I know nothing about the mechanics of Polymarket/Kalshi.

I would imagine that in theory, everyone thinks they have the best information at the time, something like:

House: "Odds that X happens? We'll put $1 on both sides to get it started. 50/50."

Someone comes along: "Oh dang, I'm definitely more than 50% confident that X is happening. Let me put $1 in." Now it's 67:33.

Someone else comes along: "Oh I'm more than 67% confident X is happening, let me put $1 in." Now it's 75:25.

And of course, you get people going: "I'm more than 25% confident that X is _not_ happening, let me put $1 in!" And now it's 60:40.

The murky part, I would imagine, comes when the odds and the payout actually act as something that influences the outcome, but in perfect theory-land, if everything goes as planned, this should move the odds to the most informationally-accurate measurement, which should, in theory, benefit observers by making this measurement public.

Re: Google employee charged with $1M Polymarket insider trading bet on search term

#54
post #45
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but let’s consider the bet the accused took: who is the most searched person in 2025. What benefit is there in knowing this ahead of time? Who is making decisions based on this?

If you run a records company I assume this might be worth some money

As opposed to the publicly available Google Trends data? As opposed to running legitimate market research? Wouldn't you rather know the most searched person in your vertical, market, etc?

The data in this example was going to be made public anyways. All the examples of prediction markets are predicated on them becoming public. You not only need the info, you need the info before it becomes public.

Re: Google employee charged with $1M Polymarket insider trading bet on search term

#55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because these markets aren't all that efficient yet (possibly because other potential market participants are scared off by insider trading charges). You don't have multiple people that all have insider information betting against each other, you have one person with insider information that cleans out everybody else. If this repeats enough, all the people without insider information will get cleaned out and exit the…

But you just said "The benefit is to people watching the prices " -- but if the odds haven't properly converged what information does watching the prices get you before-the-fact? Maybe I'm just not getting it, could you lay out a scenario?

> if the odds haven't properly converged what information does watching the prices get you before-the-fact?

How do you know we are "before-the fact"? Because these numbers are bananas?

Somebody just tanked their job, their life, for a million bucks.

Anybody who took that bet, might've individually spent only a few bucks to see that.

Everyone else (the people watching) learned the price of entertainment is a few bucks, and ruining someone's life is a million bucks.

Was that a surprise to you? If not, then the (market) prices may be said to have converged (close to) reality.

But maybe it is, and you think people would ruin their lives for less, or would pay more for human misery. In any event, the distance between whatever you think that probability is, and the return earned on these odds is information, that we all can enjoy (as benefit) before-the-fact.

Re: Google employee charged with $1M Polymarket insider trading bet on search term

#57
post #5

Of course he should be punished but the best lesson here is for bettors. Those who wager on "prediction markets": you are betting against people who have access to more information or can influence the outcome of the wager. Don't waste your money.

That's sort of the point of prediction markets: they surface insider information by allowing people to profit off of it. The benefit is to people watching the prices , who can then use that information to make better decisions ahead of the answer being revealed to the public. It's not necessarily to market participants, who need to be aware of who else is trading the market and have a credible reason to believe they…

Cool. So we benefit by prediction markets surfacing insider information about Trump's plans in the Iran conflict, and unknown insiders making hundreds of millions on that information with massive trades minutes before each announcement benefited the people watching prices in the oil market? That doesn't seem right.

Re: Google employee charged with $1M Polymarket insider trading bet on search term

#59

I was curious how a man in Switzerland gets charged in the US for a placing bets on a site that doesn't allow the US to participate. The short answer seems to be that he stole private information from a US company and used that information to enrich himself. And then got that charge enhanced with things like wire fraud and transacting on systems involving US currency. And another commentor suggests that punishing ins…

The interesting part is that he got charged with insider trading. A few attorneys on bluesky have pointed out that this is a novel use of this law since previously the trading occurred on regulated markets (e.g. SEC or CFTC regulated markets like stock markets and commodities/futures exchanges).

Re: Google employee charged with $1M Polymarket insider trading bet on search term

#60
post #5

Of course he should be punished but the best lesson here is for bettors. Those who wager on "prediction markets": you are betting against people who have access to more information or can influence the outcome of the wager. Don't waste your money.

That's a very naive take of someone who never professionally traded. There are liquidity providing, market making trading strategies that work in absence of insider information.
Post reply on HN