Live data from Hacker News

Prediction markets are ushering in a world in which news becomes about gambling

theatlantic.com

251–260 of 517 posts

Re: Prediction markets are ushering in a world in which news becomes about gambling

#251
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should have made it clearer that monied interests have a choice: be kept in check by the law, or by the guillotine.

The problem is, the guillotine solution to regulation only becomes feasible after the monied interest have thoroughly fucked society, to a level that would make living as blue-collar working in Detroit downtown today feel like being a banking executive living in Geneva.

Do you believe that the monied interests will stop on their own before we get there?

Re: Prediction markets are ushering in a world in which news becomes about gambling

#252
post #139
post #127

> The irony of prediction markets is that they are supposed to be a more trustworthy way of gleaning the future than internet clickbait and half-baked punditry, but they risk shredding whatever shared trust we still have left. The suspiciously well-timed bets that one Polymarket user placed right before the capture of Nicolás Maduro may have been just a stroke of phenomenal luck that netted a roughly $400,000 payout.…

> I'm trying to understand what the criticism is here > If I knew someone wanted me dead, of course I would want a prediction market on it, and if the odds suddenly shifted dramatically in favor of my death No, you definitely would not want that. You don't want to live in the world like this. That's the point. It's fucking horrible and dystopian, people betting on extra-legal invasions of countries, murders, things t…

I think the problem is that I don't think it would end up primarily being about gambling.

I already live in a world where people make odds about whether I'm going to die. They're called "actuaries," and they work at life insurance companies. There are also oddsmakers of the same kind at car insurance companies, etc.

Right now, I hate that people who can actually analyze enough data to make odds about these things can only earn a living working for companies that are incentivized to find ways not to pay out when the odds do break against them. I'd much rather these people be able to make their livings just calculating odds, placing bets, and being right. I would like to have access to their calculations, and not be in a position of "just take it or leave it" when I'm evaluating a prospective plan from a life insurance company, for example.

Yes, by all means, there will be gamblers in these markets. There will always be some amount of noise, just like there is in the stock market. But why would that end up being the bulk of the industry? Just like with Wall Street, I would expect companies to grow up around these markets that specialize in getting the odds of things right, and making money off of their predictions. If the market ever became truly efficient, I think we would have a MUCH better idea than we do now about the likelihood of all kinds of things.

Heck, even if I think of something as apparently mundane as weather forecasting, if somebody came up with a breakout model that was right substantially more often, I would expect they would be able to raise all sorts of capital around it and start winning in all the weather forecasting markets, which would then make their predictions a reliable signal, and we'd finally have better information about what the weather is going to do.

I think one part I must be missing is why so many people are assuming that the primary user of prediction markets would be gamblers instead of specialists, especially once they operated at scale. I just don't see why that would happen. Anywhere there's an opportunity to make money reliably by coming up with better analysis or prediction tools, capital will flock there and incentivize coming up with better analysis or prediction tools.

I think I really would like to live in a world where that was highly incentivized, and I'm confused why people would not want that.

ETA: I don't think the gamblers would ruin this any more than they ruin Wall Street. I don't think they have enough capital to matter. (They are, after all, prone to losing money.)

Re: Prediction markets are ushering in a world in which news becomes about gambling

#253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, these markets exist in the real world, so as their size and use increases, the more likely the odds will influence real world events. Look at sports betting for a much smaller example. Match fixing is known. Electricity markets are gamed for individual profits at the detriment to everyone and the stability of the system, even with regulators trying to keep things stable. Enough "Market for all the things" al…

> Enough "Market for all the things" already.. See, there are two major flavours of pro-market attitudes. The first one is "if we allow many independent individuals to try their own approaches to a problem and let the people with "better" approach to personally profit from it handsomely and make them compete against each other in an environment with objective-ish judgement of "what is better" instead of "impress the…

Right, a market is a small tool of larger systems. That’s fine, hard to get right but can make systems better. Type two just seems to be the cargo culted everywhere..

Re: Prediction markets are ushering in a world in which news becomes about gambling

#254
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It beats polls for elections ONLY until someone notices it is being used as the basis of news stories and figures out it will be four orders of magnitude cheaper to manipulate that small market and make the news idiots broadcast that opinions have changed than to actually deploy all the adverts needed to change the opinions. The very low stakes you point out make this even easier to put a thumb on the scales. Goodhar…

News already broadcast tons of nonsense. Political commentary is just brain rot. Economic commentary might be just as well generated by one of those Markov chain string generators - it would make as much sense. >>out it will be four orders of magnitude cheaper to manipulate that small market and make the news idiots broadcast that opinions have changed than to actually deploy all the adverts needed to change the opin…

Right, we agree on just about everything. Political and economic commentary is generally brain rot, and Polymarket, etc. is not an accurate predictive tool

And yes, if it starts to be seen as one of the levers to manipulate in manipulating public opinion, it will become more expensive. That does not improve it's predictive value, since we never really know how expensive it is on either side relative to the bankrolls and motivations of those who might want to manipulate it.

But for anyone who wants to use it as a crystal ball, go right on ahead — good luck with that!

Re: Prediction markets are ushering in a world in which news becomes about gambling

#255
post #249
post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So unless they have big money to wager, they don't have big money to gain. It requires that they put down collateral (the purchase of the the yes bets) that they lose if they don't meet the contract, so they do have to have starting capital. > because other people have to take the opposite side. That is to say that there must be people offering the bounty. The size of the bounty isn't defined by the price of the co…

> The size of the bounty isn't defined by the price of the contract, but the total upside available in the order book. But one person doesn't get the whole thing. ALL the people holding that side of the contract split the payout, in proportion to the size of their holdings in that side of the market. I think if I use hypothetical numbers, it will help me explain how I think it works, and maybe this will help someone…

> I think that means 4,500 shares, or $450,000, is on the "No" side and 500 shares, or $50,000 is on the "Yes" side. Do I have that right so far?

No - there's always an equal number of contract outstanding on both sides of the bet. A contract is a promise from the person who sold "no" to pay the person who bought "yes" a dollar if the outcome happens. These contracts can trade from anywhere between 1 cent to 99 cents corresponding to a 1% chance to a 99% chance that you would die*. The odds the market reports is just whatever price the last contract traded at (or alternatively whatever price sits between the current open offers to buy/sell contracts. In liquid markets these tend to be the same).

> If nothing changes about the market and I'm still alive at the end of the day, everyone who holds a "No" share splits the $500,000 pot, correct? There are 4,500 of them, so they each get $111.11 per share.

They each get $1 per share. Their profit is $1 minus how much they paid for the share. It's not (meaningfully) a shared pot which is divided up, it's a fixed amount per share.

> They decide they want to dump $50,000 in on the "Yes" side. That's not going to buy them 500 shares, because they would need someone willing to sell 500 shares at the current price.

Ignoring the numbers at this point - you're generally right that they need to find someone willing to sell them the contracts. The existence of a large number of outstanding contracts doesn't guarantee this - they might be held by someone who is holding them to minimize the payout a hitman could get for killing you for instance.

The most direct guarantee is the order book The order book is the collection of open offers "I'm willing to sell X yes-contracts at Y price" that the market has for potential purchasers. The hitman can look at this and snatch up all of these simultaneously (up to some race conditions in the market - we can mostly pretend those don't exist but they do introduce some risk on the hitmans side). This can be thought of as the size of the currently available bounty.

There's a chance the market will continually over-price these yes contracts - and the hitman will never kill you as a result. That would be a huge mistake on all the financially motivated holders of yes contracts though - their positions go from worth something (if they sell to the aspiring hitman) to worth nothing if they don't price them low enough. In general you should expect the market to find the price at which a hitman will carry out the contract - so long as there's enough money in the market in the first place.

* Ignoring transaction fees and the time value of money, it's close enough for this discussion.

Re: Prediction markets are ushering in a world in which news becomes about gambling

#256
post #255
post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The size of the bounty isn't defined by the price of the contract, but the total upside available in the order book. But one person doesn't get the whole thing. ALL the people holding that side of the contract split the payout, in proportion to the size of their holdings in that side of the market. I think if I use hypothetical numbers, it will help me explain how I think it works, and maybe this will help someone…

> I think that means 4,500 shares, or $450,000, is on the "No" side and 500 shares, or $50,000 is on the "Yes" side. Do I have that right so far? No - there's always an equal number of contract outstanding on both sides of the bet. A contract is a promise from the person who sold "no" to pay the person who bought "yes" a dollar if the outcome happens. These contracts can trade from anywhere between 1 cent to 99 cents…

But the hitman still does not get the entire value of the contract. The hitman gets the value of the number of shares he can afford to buy, but that's not the whole contract by any means.

I think I understand what you're saying about the pricing. Am I correct in saying, then, that if the odds are 90% in favor of my living through the contract, the "No, smeej won't die today" price should be close to $0.10 (again, ignoring fees and the time value of money)?

If the hitman tries to buy in with 10% of the total funds already in the market, the odds/price are going to shift hard. It's going to devour a huge chunk of the order book. Any market that suddenly has someone come in at 10% of the whole market value is going to get a massive trading wick. So yeah, he'd get some shares at $0.10, but he's probably going to eat the open order book to a much higher cost. He can 10x some very small portion of his money (however many shares are on the book at $0.10), but he can only 5x his money at $0.20, or 3x at $0.33.

Even if we assume he does have $50k to dump into the market, I still don't see how he's going to more than triple his money, which is a heck of a lot less than taking the entire market's value as though it were a bounty.

Re: Prediction markets are ushering in a world in which news becomes about gambling

#257
post #256
post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think that means 4,500 shares, or $450,000, is on the "No" side and 500 shares, or $50,000 is on the "Yes" side. Do I have that right so far? No - there's always an equal number of contract outstanding on both sides of the bet. A contract is a promise from the person who sold "no" to pay the person who bought "yes" a dollar if the outcome happens. These contracts can trade from anywhere between 1 cent to 99 cents…

But the hitman still does not get the entire value of the contract. The hitman gets the value of the number of shares he can afford to buy, but that's not the whole contract by any means. I think I understand what you're saying about the pricing. Am I correct in saying, then, that if the odds are 90% in favor of my living through the contract, the "No, smeej won't die today" price should be close to $0.10 (again, ign…

Yes - we agree on how the pricing and odds work now :)

The hitman shouldn't expect to capture the value of the entire open interest. The market here is serving to negotiate the bounty with speculators betting that too much was offered taking the rest (a privilege they pay for by buying contracts that only pay out if they don't take too much). It's a curious form of negotiation since the people paying for the murder don't participate... but should (in a very theoretical efficient market) come to a "fair" (large enough to get the job done, and no larger) payment for the hitman.

2xing your money in a night is a huge payout, I think you're overestimating how high the multiplier on the capital requirement needs to be. That said, if you aren't, and you need a 5x payout to find a hitman then no rational speculator would purchase contracts for more then $0.20...

Re: Prediction markets are ushering in a world in which news becomes about gambling

#258
post #136
post #127

> The irony of prediction markets is that they are supposed to be a more trustworthy way of gleaning the future than internet clickbait and half-baked punditry, but they risk shredding whatever shared trust we still have left. The suspiciously well-timed bets that one Polymarket user placed right before the capture of Nicolás Maduro may have been just a stroke of phenomenal luck that netted a roughly $400,000 payout.…

If the prediction market is for a non-trivial amount, it's likely someone is going to kill you in exchange for the money the prediction market offered them . The prediction market isn't acting as a prophet here, it's acting as a plausibly deniable murder for hire service and you are its victim. The people "betting against" you dying just paid to have you killed.

This was discussed on polymarket with the Galve Goat burning bet and assume it's why

Essentially it's a big straw goat in Sweden that vandals sometime set on fire.

Right towards the end as the probability approaches zero there's a huge profit incentive, "done deals" usually go under well under 1¢ meaning 100-200x returns.

A US man once traveled to Sweden to set the goat on fire, he was caught, fined $20k(?) and then fled the country before paying the fine.

Risk reward in a situation like this absolutely creates a situation for prediction markets similar to the observer effect in physics, it's no longer predicting the future and instead altering it.

Re: Prediction markets are ushering in a world in which news becomes about gambling

#259

Part of me wishes there were prediction markets for flight delays. The ETAs are wildly inaccurate, like last time the counter staff suggested I not reschedule cause our plane was arriving in 15min, when I could see on a slightly hard to find site that the plane was still grounded 500mi away. Part of me is careful what I wish for, starting with passengers bothering staff even more.

Isn't travel insurance one form of this?

Do you mean the kind that pays for cancellations? The scenario I'm sometimes in is the flight is delayed, I can switch for free anyway, but I don't want to have to wait a whole day or something. So it becomes a game of, stick with current flight or switch, and which one do I switch to.

Re: Prediction markets are ushering in a world in which news becomes about gambling

#260

Part of me wishes there were prediction markets for flight delays. The ETAs are wildly inaccurate, like last time the counter staff suggested I not reschedule cause our plane was arriving in 15min, when I could see on a slightly hard to find site that the plane was still grounded 500mi away. Part of me is careful what I wish for, starting with passengers bothering staff even more.

Flightly or flightradar24 listens to air traffic control and updates the app before any announcements are made. Huge help for delays or gate changes.

I'll try that one. Last time was frantic and tried like 5 bad sites before finding at least where the plane was.

But maybe the passengers or crew on that plane had a better idea of why they were delayed, which I'm not sure any site would show. I've been on the other end too, knowing my plane isn't taking off due to a jammed door and texting updates to someone who was supposed to pick me up on the other end.

Post reply on HN