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

Traders placed over $1B in perfectly timed bets on the Iran war

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 263 posts

Re: Traders placed over $1B in perfectly timed bets on the Iran war

#211

Post by tredre3 »

shigawire wrote: post #28
thot_experiment wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This applies to almost everyone working on SaaS; not in all cases, but the absolute majority work on SaaS means creating artificial scarcity in order to extract value from people. It is a fundamentally evil, antisocial, anti human thing to do. If you believe that is okay to restrict access to infinite resources to preserve the status quo you deserve the same place in hell as the people pushing gambling. Don't create…

> almost everyone working on SaaS; not in all cases, but the absolute majority work on SaaS means creating artificial scarcity in order to extract value from people. Maybe this is just my lack of understanding in how most SaaS companies operate... But to me making software that people find valuable and charging them for that is not inherently immoral. Surely that is the majority of cases?

People like thot_experiment don't believe in intellectual property, period.

They believe that everything that is created should be public domain when the cost of replicating it is zero (books, media, software, music, most art). Those people also generally believe that borders and countries shouldn't exist.

Whilst I respect their worldview, I have found that it's not worth arguing with this group because they typically refuse to explain how such world would work, handwaving away any problems you'll bring up.

Re: Traders placed over $1B in perfectly timed bets on the Iran war

#212

Post by thot_experiment »

throwaway132448 wrote: post #40
thot_experiment wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This applies to almost everyone working on SaaS; not in all cases, but the absolute majority work on SaaS means creating artificial scarcity in order to extract value from people. It is a fundamentally evil, antisocial, anti human thing to do. If you believe that is okay to restrict access to infinite resources to preserve the status quo you deserve the same place in hell as the people pushing gambling. Don't create…

This is pseudo-intellectual drivel. Creating value and then charging for it is not creating “artificial scarcity”, any more than doing nothing is creating “artificial scarcity” by absence of value. There was no “infinite resource” that just happened to exist before the work was put in to create it. And creating value is - almost by definition - completely orthogonal to zero sum games.

What are you talking about, most SaaS could be software that just runs on a computer, it's SaaS because you need a way to retain control to charge for it. Most of the effort going into developing software this way goes into the part that holds onto the value because distributed systems are hard. A lot of software is drastically easier to create if you don't turn it into SaaS. In any case I don't think SaaS companies don't create value, but I think the cost for that value is too high.

Re: Traders placed over $1B in perfectly timed bets on the Iran war

#213

Post by stouset »

OutOfHere wrote: post #62
firebot wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most gamblers prescribe to the cost sunk fallacy and keep 'one more time'ing it to bankruptcy. Math wins over your feels every time.

If you follow your math, such gambling losers don't really have that much money to bet on an ongoing basis. The ones who support the losing side on prediction markets are the ones who usually do fine, but sometimes are taken by surprise.

Out of curiosity, are you aware of the existence of Las Vegas, Nevada?

Re: Traders placed over $1B in perfectly timed bets on the Iran war

#214

Post by stouset »

nojito wrote: post #96
reactordev wrote: post #32

Prediction Markets require insider trading to function... how do people not know this? It's a setup from day one. If you have the knowledge, you're going to cash in, if you don't have the knowledge, you are throwing your money away.

>Prediction Markets require insider trading to function. And yet there are folks like me who have been on them for years before kalshi/polymarket making a very good side income from them without having insider knowledge. Prediction markets as a whole are very very inefficient. That's not to say that insider trading doesn't exist but you can't claim that they require insider trading to function.

> making a very good side income

If you had a reliable edge, your income would be exponential. Why isn’t it?

Re: Traders placed over $1B in perfectly timed bets on the Iran war

#215

Post by thot_experiment »

tredre3 wrote: post #211
shigawire wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> almost everyone working on SaaS; not in all cases, but the absolute majority work on SaaS means creating artificial scarcity in order to extract value from people. Maybe this is just my lack of understanding in how most SaaS companies operate... But to me making software that people find valuable and charging them for that is not inherently immoral. Surely that is the majority of cases?

People like thot_experiment don't believe in intellectual property, period. They believe that everything that is created should be public domain when the cost of replicating it is zero (books, media, software, music, most art). Those people also generally believe that borders and countries shouldn't exist. Whilst I respect their worldview, I have found that it's not worth arguing with this group because they typicall…

I actually care only about one specific thing here.

Do you believe it is moral to restrict access to something that is effectively infinite?

Re: Traders placed over $1B in perfectly timed bets on the Iran war

#216

Post by blurbleblurble »

jaredklewis wrote: post #192
lostlogin wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The current setup does sort of seem like a tax on being stupid. More like a tax on being ethical or having any morality.

What is unethical? The good point of prediction markets is that they provide information. This information is available to everyone, for free, which benefits everyone. Insiders help achieve this. Insiders have information and by participating in the market they then expose and share that information. So this is good. If we ban insiders, we're just banning accurate information from getting into the market. If we do th…

"Information" is not neutrally reflective of some objective, deterministic reality. Processes involving information are slippery and reflexive, and that's the danger people are all but shouting for you to see. The feedback loops have extreme potential. The danger isn't in "exposing information" it's in people coercing reality to fit their bet. Peoples' lives are on the line.

The wild thing is that prediction market dabbler rationalists who think they're betting on the outcome of a pre-written fiction story are actually just upping the reward for someone to come along and bomb people to death. Your participation is not neutral. You are culpable in the outcome of the situation you're "gambling" on which has not been determined yet and you are literally throwing fuel on the fire. No matter which way you bet it's fuel.

I'm sorry, I don't believe you personally deserve it but for the betterment of the everyone we have no choice but to shame people like you (prediction market rationalizers) via downvotes and hot replies until you can see through the limits of your overly simple model of reality.

I don't think you're a bad or stupid person, but when it comes to your views on prediction markets, they are very bad and very stupid. Thankfully you are not your beliefs and you are free to change them at any time. I beg you to reconsider this one.

Re: Traders placed over $1B in perfectly timed bets on the Iran war

#217

Post by Tade0 »

lesuorac wrote: post #147
Tade0 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Airlines in particular prefer to have a predictable price of fuel, whatever it might be, so they buy futures.

Do they? Afaik, they don't [1]. > WONG: However, Gerry says most of the major airlines in the U.S. eventually soured on fuel hedging. One reason - the Wall Street transaction fees to make these hedges got expensive. > WOODS: Plus, Gerry says the airlines found that they could make money the old-fashioned way by raising prices. Today, none of the major airlines in the U.S. are hedging. Hedging is one of those things t…

That's the US. Meanwhile in Europe the practice is alive and well:

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/2026/03/25/ryanair-to-ho...

> European carriers have hedged about 80 per cent of the fuel they need for this year and typically take out new hedges on a rolling basis to lock in future prices.

Re: Traders placed over $1B in perfectly timed bets on the Iran war

#218

Post by naruhodo »

sneak wrote: post #203
lostlogin wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The current setup does sort of seem like a tax on being stupid. More like a tax on being ethical or having any morality.

Nobody is required to participate in these markets.

Nobody is required to use hacks in competitive multiplayer video games. You may choose to play fairly and be beaten over and over again.

If there are no consequences for the cheaters, it becomes essentially mandatory, and that's without there being money on the line.

Re: Traders placed over $1B in perfectly timed bets on the Iran war

#220

Post by SirMaster »

low_tech_love wrote: post #130
SirMaster wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the point of them is they are “truth machines” they give a financial incentive for the insider class to essentially share what they know. The benefit to those outside the insider class are that we now have a better idea of the potential outcome.

How can anyone differentiate an insider bet from a normal one enough to actually make use of it?

I think the premise is that the betting market prediction odds should be more accurate than other sources of statistics because of the underlying financial incentive.
Post reply on HN