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

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

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 234 posts

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

#171

Post by acejam »

daveguy wrote: post #150
hilariously wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crypto is a speculative investment vehicle, its basically a lottery machine - why would people who are so invested in a lottery machine that you can avoid taxes or buy drugs with be surprised they are considered part of the con artists doing the pump and dumps?

Don't forget about regimes like Iran and North Korea using crypto to receive bribes, ransomware payments, and launder money. Crypto is a cesspool. Just wait for the bank runs when everyone tries to bail out. There's a reason we have banking regulations.

> Crypto is a cesspool.

Wait until you hear about the US Dollar.

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

#172

Post by vel0city »

chii wrote: post #111
valleyer wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In most modern societies, we regulate all sorts of things that people would otherwise willingly do to their own detriment. We ban drugs; we have labor laws; we have usury laws; we require seatbelts; we have securities regulations; etc. (Notably, until very recently, this included most forms of gambling.) So the mere fact that losers are voluntary does not, IMO, make the situation good.

all of those things you mentioned have damages sustained on third parties that did not have consent. And tbh, my opinion is that the banning of drugs have done more harm than not banning it (but instead, allow it to be sold safely and cheaply). Gambling to me, is like that. Banning it doesn't stop it, and it has barely any harm other than to the person who over-indulge. Regulating it is a good idea - where regulating…

> all of those things you mentioned have damages sustained on third parties that did not have consent.

The family that suddenly finds themselves homeless because one parent decided to go deep into debt to fuel their gambling addiction sure seems to have "damages sustained on third parties that did not have consent."

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

#173

Post by alistairSH »

daveguy wrote: post #150
hilariously wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crypto is a speculative investment vehicle, its basically a lottery machine - why would people who are so invested in a lottery machine that you can avoid taxes or buy drugs with be surprised they are considered part of the con artists doing the pump and dumps?

Don't forget about regimes like Iran and North Korea using crypto to receive bribes, ransomware payments, and launder money. Crypto is a cesspool. Just wait for the bank runs when everyone tries to bail out. There's a reason we have banking regulations.

Don't forget about regimes like the USA a using crypto to receive bribes, ransomware payments, and launder money. Crypto is a cesspool.

Sadly, it's not limited to "evil dictatorships" on the other side of the world.

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

#174

Post by rithdmc »

rererereferred wrote: post #168
somenameforme wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think this is entirely true. Polymarket is extremely transparent on user accounts and markets so you can see who is betting what, their other bets, and so on. The article mentions that other users fingered him for insider trading. That itself opens up an opportunity for profit, by simply following the trades on what he seems to be an insider on. It'd be like if you could see in real time what Nancy Pelosi was…

Some predictions are like "How many shoes will be thrown at the next Bush speech?" Just the presence of the question affects the outcome.

For a specific example, see the WNBA green sex toy Polymarket betting debacle.

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

#175

Post by Aardwolf »

> He did not enter a plea and was released on a $2.25 million bond

I'm not familiar with the US system of bond. Is this payment a kind of fine that you don't get back, or a temporary payment? And what does it give you? I mean if prosecuted you get prison anyway, right?

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

#176

Post by lesuorac »

selectodude wrote: post #170
julianozen wrote: post #166

So, after doing some light Googling and AI research, this doesn’t seem to be strictly an “insider trading” charge from the SEC. It looks more like a broader fraud case. The charges are commodities fraud / Commodity Exchange Act violation, wire fraud, and money laundering, and the case is being brought by the DOJ. So, lawyers, please correct me if I’m wrong, but this feels more like prosecutors found a legal framework…

Yeah I’m not entirely sure how what he did was illegal. I hope he can afford good attorneys. Hard to see this as anything other than a way to take the heat off the White House for using insider information to profit on prop betting sites.

The charges are a bit funny. [1] "From at least in or about October 2025 up to and including at least in or about December 2025, in the Southern District of New York and elsewhere outside of the jurisdiction of any particular State or district of the United States".

Um yes, everywhere is either inside of or outside of the jurisdiction of SDNY. But argueable, if you're charging somebody it only matters if it's _inside of_.

[1]: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/media/1442621/dl

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

#177

Post by jpadkins »

55555 wrote: post #40
nostrademons wrote: post #11

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…

yes it is good in many scenarios.

Imagine bad (incorrect and potentially harmful) information is public knowledge. Examples are "X cures cancer" or "Is Y dangerous to consume".

A prediction market will be seeded by public knowledge (of course it cures cancer or its safe to consume), which you describe "suckers". History is filled with many examples of bad public knowledge that turned out to be false (e.g. DDT is safe pesticide).

An insider (someone who knows the drug trial results, or works at the Corp creating the harmful substance) is incentivized to trade on that knowledge, which creates a better informed public (via people who pay attention to prediction markets).

Why does secret(insider) knowledge exist? To the benefit of the organization that wants to keep the knowledge secret. Insider trading laws purpose is to keep Corp and gov orgs in power. They prevent the dissemination of true information (for private power). Prediction markets incentivize the dissemination of true information, a public good.

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

#178

Post by bpicolo »

Aardwolf wrote: post #175

> He did not enter a plea and was released on a $2.25 million bond I'm not familiar with the US system of bond. Is this payment a kind of fine that you don't get back, or a temporary payment? And what does it give you? I mean if prosecuted you get prison anyway, right?

It’s temporary, yes. Basically just collateral to promise you’ll show up for the court hearings.

Often they’re paid through bondsman who finance bonds (you pay them a fee). Which also results in a bounty hunting industry for the people that do run away.

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

#179

Post by tekla »

Aardwolf wrote: post #175

> He did not enter a plea and was released on a $2.25 million bond I'm not familiar with the US system of bond. Is this payment a kind of fine that you don't get back, or a temporary payment? And what does it give you? I mean if prosecuted you get prison anyway, right?

There is some differences between bail and bond, but basically the same thing. Is a payment that lets you out of prison until trial under conditions. If you break conditions, payment is forfeited, but returned otherwise

This is because time to trial/actual trial itself can take a long time and there is generally dislike of keeping a person in confinement on the chance they are innocent.

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

#180

Post by ajb257 »

Aardwolf wrote: post #175

> He did not enter a plea and was released on a $2.25 million bond I'm not familiar with the US system of bond. Is this payment a kind of fine that you don't get back, or a temporary payment? And what does it give you? I mean if prosecuted you get prison anyway, right?

It's temporary, yes. If you show up for your court date it's returned to you - it's collateral.
Post reply on HN