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

Bets on US-Iran ceasefire show signs of insider knowledge, say experts

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 202 posts

Re: Bets on US-Iran ceasefire show signs of insider knowledge, say experts

#131

Post by netsharc »

871ajh-121 wrote: post #52

Trump always announces ceasefires, negotiations and "deals" when the other party doesn't even know about it. Or, in the middle of real negotiations, he attacks. This 5 day extension is to replenish US stocks and build up the marines in the region. while Israel continues to attack all the time. The only deal that may have emerged in secret is for Iran not to hit the Dimona nuclear power plant and for Israel/US not to…

But surprisingly the market see this bullshit and savors it, they went up, after all..

Are they operating on hopes and prayers that Trump isn't lying "this time"? Or does everybody know it's all crap but if everyone else is buying, they don't want to miss the tide?

Re: Bets on US-Iran ceasefire show signs of insider knowledge, say experts

#132

Post by cj »

phil21 wrote: post #90
cj wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Isn’t one of the points of betting markets is to incentivize this? No. It’s an unintended side effect that risks breaking trust in the system by (the majority of) players who don’t have insider knowledge.

Eh what? It’s literally the only reason for prediction markets to exist. Otherwise they are simple gambling and pointless. The only way you get more wisdom from “the crowd” is if it teases folks who hold non-public (or at least less public) information into the market to refine the odds towards what they should be. Without insider information the entire concept is dead on arrival. Yes randos are gonna gamble because…

Have you been to a casino?

Gambling is a billion dollar business.

Re: Bets on US-Iran ceasefire show signs of insider knowledge, say experts

#133

Post by lucaspm98 »

bjackman wrote: post #34
bjackman wrote: post #30

What signs? This article is absolute slop (not AI, but slop). I do not have any reason to doubt that people are doing insider trading. The US admin is obviously corrupt and the Iran attacks are the most abject symptom of its corruption so far. But you can't just put out a bunch of completely isolated observations with zero analysis and say "that looks like insider trading". There is nothing at all in here that presen…

Breakdown of the presented points: > Eight accounts, all newly created around 21 March, bet a total of nearly $70,000 (£52,000) on there being a ceasefire. Is that anomalous? Are these numbers large in context? > They stand to make nearly $820,000 if such a deal is reached before 31 March. Yes that is indeed how prediction markets work for unlikely events? > An account that made the same bet was created shortly befor…

Publications must love they can now pump out an article every time someone creates a new account to place a large wager on a prediction market.

Having been a semi-pro sports bettor for a short stint as it went through legalization in the U.S., I’ve personally had tens of thousands wagered on sports teams I’ve never heard of before. Over the course of thousands of bets it becomes statistically inevitable that you have wagers placed right before major news (both for and against you).

It’s even entirely possible this individual has some or all their position hedged on another platform effectively capture a tiny arbitrage in the market.

There’s tons of upstart market makers on these prediction markets doing hundreds of thousands in volume a week as they provide liquidity, grinding out small edges in a way you’d never be able to know their true exposure to any one market across platforms.

It’s of course entirely possible this is an insider, but as a journalist you need something more than a large bet + good timing. Out of millions of wagers there will inevitably be plenty of random people who bet on a football game 5 minutes before the quarterback gets injured purely out of dumb luck.

Re: Bets on US-Iran ceasefire show signs of insider knowledge, say experts

#134

Post by Karrot_Kream »

hatthew wrote: post #122
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #20

Couldn't insiders just trade Brent Crude futures and do the same thing? There's more than enough liquidity in Brent that an insider can make great money.

Not familiar with Brent Crude futures, is it possible to trade them anonymously the way you can on Polymarket?

Look, no offense here, but if you're this unaware of how oil markets work, and it seems like markets in general work, I suggest doing at least some initial googling before digesting this story.

I realize for some the whole appeal of this kind of story is "look Trump bad" and then to get into the comments about how bad he is to play political sportsball, but insider trading is sadly a bipartisan phenomenon. No question though that this admin is the most brazen about its corruption in my lifetime though.

Re: Bets on US-Iran ceasefire show signs of insider knowledge, say experts

#135

Post by jMyles »

peter422 wrote: post #98
broof wrote: post #83

Isn’t one of the points of betting markets is to incentivize this? Now me, as someone who doesn’t have access to insider knowledge, can know that there’s a noticeably increased chance of what’s going to happen. I do think maybe there should be some sort of feature to prevent last minute bets that utilizes insider knowledge, and I do admit there are considerable negative externalities to this system but it’s not clear…

Can we at least debate the obvious externality that an insider might skew their advice or actions to personally profit instead of doing whatever they think is most appropriate for their job? That seems like a big one

That phenomenon exists regardless. There may be some benefit to make it transparent.

All war is for profit anyway - on sufficiently long time scales, stopping war is the imperative.

Re: Bets on US-Iran ceasefire show signs of insider knowledge, say experts

#136

Post by roadside_picnic »

netsharc wrote: post #123
mikkupikku wrote: post #17

If the administration decides to end this stupid war just so they can cash out some profitable bets... I don't even know what I would think. The whole thing is so stupid it makes my head hurt.

Isn't the problem that they can't end the war unilaterally? The Iranian regime is justifiably pissed off and is still flinging drones and rockets towards any viable target, and any ceasefire will be with acceptance of their terms. The Trump/Netanyahu collection of dumb ego won't be able to accept being dictated terms. So like in Game of Thrones, we hope a Jamie Lannister shows up...

This was my thought as well. Trump today claims he had long discussions with Iranian leadership over the weekend and Iran claims such a thing never happened.

Not only is Iran justifiably angry at its attackers, they have no reason to trust a ceasefire would be respected, and, furthermore, despite damage taken, stand to gain quite a lot if the war progresses as it has. Currently Iran is exporting more oil than ever before[0]. If the war continues as is they stand to emerge a much, much more dominant power on the world stage. Essentially being to BRICS what the GCC countries have been to the US (although much better defended).

Even the threats against their energy infrastructure can't really be backed up effectively. Iran has intentionally built its energy infrastructure to be highly distributed. Meanwhile Israel's infrastructure is highly centralized, with a small number of power plants providing massive proportions of the nations infrastructure. All this meaning that Iran can retaliate much more effectively the they can be harmed.

0. https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/irans-control-of-hormu...

Re: Bets on US-Iran ceasefire show signs of insider knowledge, say experts

#137

Post by decafninja »

Aurornis wrote: post #120
bigfatkitten wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Noem was removed because she fell out of favour with Trump.

Yes, due to the $220 million advertising spend scandal and her claims about it.

Because she blamed it on Trump. Had she not blamed Trump, he would have likely protected her.

Re: Bets on US-Iran ceasefire show signs of insider knowledge, say experts

#138

Post by input_sh »

bethekidyouwant wrote: post #103
boramalper wrote: post #27

> The wallets “definitely [look like] someone with some degree of inside info”, said Ben Yorke, formerly a researcher with CoinTelegraph, now building an AI trading platform called Starchild. Ben Yorke is the only expert I see mentioned in the article, so it'd be a lot more accurate (and a lot less sensational) if The Guardian changed its title to "... says one expert" (but it wouldn't sound as interesting then, woul…

You don’t have to be an insider to know that the US wants to broker a peace deal now that they’ve gotten themselves deep in the shit. Also, how could a Washington insider know if a peace deal will actually be brokered they have to negotiate with the other party after all.

Betting on a ceasefire isn't the interesting part, placing a five digit bet on a ceasefire by March 31st using brand-new accounts is.

Do you have any other plausible explanation for this behaviour? I can't think of any, if it's just like your average WallStreetBets gambler, why would they be making these bets from brand-new accounts?

Re: Bets on US-Iran ceasefire show signs of insider knowledge, say experts

#139

Post by unethical_ban »

Aurornis wrote: post #120
bigfatkitten wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Noem was removed because she fell out of favour with Trump.

Yes, due to the $220 million advertising spend scandal and her claims about it.

She should have been tied to a wooden post and shipped out of DC on an uncovered railcar for labelling a peaceful protester assassinated by ICE a "domestic terrorist".

Her scandal was not being subtle enough with the theft of government funds for Trump's taste, and he found a way to get rid of her that he could claim he had no part in.

Re: Bets on US-Iran ceasefire show signs of insider knowledge, say experts

#140

Post by [deleted] »

ragebol wrote: post #64
delecti wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're orthogonal, so there's no barrier. They're all nefarious, and most are also incompetent.

Getting yourself installed as president while knowing you are incompetent (I mean, look at all those bankrupt businesses, he should know) is nefarious in itself. His entourage is nefarious for supporting the incompetency for their own gain.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN