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

New York Times and The Athletic workers demand company scrap Kalshi deal

newsguild.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 227 posts

Re: New York Times and The Athletic workers demand company scrap Kalshi deal

#101

Post by ninglor »

gadders wrote: post #88
strictnein wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've been able to gamble on your mobile device for 100 years in the UK? Modern gambling isn't you talking to a bookie and putting down $100 on your favorite team. That should still be legal. Phone apps which learn your behavior, your favorite teams, the offers you are likely to accept, the time of day that you're most likely to make a bet, etc etc and use that to barrage you with notifications, "free" plays, high p…

"A more recent survey in 2022, conducted by the United Kingdom Gambling Commission found that 'headline problem gambling rate is statistically stable at 0.2%. The moderate risk and low risk rates are also statistically stable at 0.9% and 1.4% respectively.'[45]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_gambling_in_the_Uni...

The Thalamos link describes a trend from 2023 to 2024. This would not be reflected in a survey from 2022.

Re: New York Times and The Athletic workers demand company scrap Kalshi deal

#102

Post by newspaper1 »

santadays wrote: post #9
pavel_lishin wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would they support a deal with a company doing harm to people?

I read it as the liberal elite hate young men... so damaging them is a good thing.

I think you're misinterpreting a very specific messaging mission the neo-liberals went on. They promoted a particular brand of "feminism" to get Hillary Clinton elected. This is no longer part of their platform, and it's no longer needed as it turns out Islamaphobia, Epstein and AIPAC (and similar endeavours) were better control levers that transcend party lines. Gaza is destroyed and we're at war with Iran, mission accomplished, if not delayed a bit.

Re: New York Times and The Athletic workers demand company scrap Kalshi deal

#103

Post by jameshart »

wbl wrote: post #10
mikeryan wrote: post #6

I really don’t understand how these markets survive a competent DOJ considering the rate they’re having to ban people for “insider trading”. Fully appreciate the Unions position here.

Insider trading is legal in commodities markets. If I am engaged in a hedging transaction I am doing so because I know about risks that I want to offload, and the buyer does also. You don't come to commodities markets without information.

If you and the buyer know about the risks then you’re not making a trade based on material non public information, are you?

If you make a hedging trade while having material knowledge that you withhold from the counterparty… well, that sounds like it could be edging towards fraud. Like taking out life insurance while hiding a medical condition.

But sure, it’s not against the law to do business with a sucker, so there’s degrees here.

Re: New York Times and The Athletic workers demand company scrap Kalshi deal

#106

Post by solatic »

dominotw wrote: post #56
cdrnsf wrote: post #34

Sports gambling is a cancer, as are prediction markets. None of it should've been legalized and all of it should be banned.

have you seen stock market these days?

The stock market isn't fundamentally a gamble. Spending money to buy a share of a company's future dividends is a sound way to invest money and earn a return on it.

The problem with the stock market is when there aren't enough new companies going public to soak up the spigot of all the capital that people want to invest, leading average P/E ratios to increase over time. There is too much money chasing too few earnings. When the underlying fundamentals don't match up, then all that investors are doing is speculating that someone else will be the bigger fool and buy from them at an even more unreasonable price - and that is a gamble.

Re: New York Times and The Athletic workers demand company scrap Kalshi deal

#107

Post by cyberax »

bluecalm wrote: post #90
amelius wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, long term trading is what we should stimulate because it corresponds to investments based on insights in the underlying companies. Short term trading, however ... Maybe we should just put limits on how short one can own a stock (?)

You want short term trading because you want the prices to be as close to efficient as possible. You may never trade short term but at some point you are going to buy and at some point you are going to sell. Market being far from efficient one would hurt you there. So let them trade and discover price. You don't have to play that game but you still benefit.

> You want short term trading because you want the prices to be as close to efficient as possible

But do I want the prices to be as efficient as possible?

Re: New York Times and The Athletic workers demand company scrap Kalshi deal

#108

Post by dylan604 »

nightpool wrote: post #100
swozey wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Predication markets are literally causing people to start wildfires across the globe , I thought it was just a USA thing going on, but it's global.

Do you have any sources for this? My understanding is that all of the discussion about prediction market wildfires are completely speculative, nobody has actually started a wildfire for a prediction market payout yet.

If you win this bet, does the payout come delivered to your door by the police and fire chief?

Re: New York Times and The Athletic workers demand company scrap Kalshi deal

#109

Post by jceg »

Most of the top level comments support scrapping the deal, most of them on the basis that "sports gambling is a cancer." A cancer for whom? I want to take the opposite position: let people do whatever they want, as long as they bear the consequences of their decisions instead of socializing the risk. You don't like betting or gambling? Great, then don't do it. But forcing your preferences on others is not the way.

Re: New York Times and The Athletic workers demand company scrap Kalshi deal

#110

Post by orangecat »

ambicapter wrote: post #92
bluecalm wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You want short term trading because you want the prices to be as close to efficient as possible. You may never trade short term but at some point you are going to buy and at some point you are going to sell. Market being far from efficient one would hurt you there. So let them trade and discover price. You don't have to play that game but you still benefit.

Long-term traders don't need the price to be as "efficient" as possible by definition.

Maybe an extra 1% spread doesn't matter if you buy and hold for 50 years, but for 2 years it absolutely does.
Post reply on HN