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

Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 138 posts

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#41

Post by zarzavat »

arter45 wrote: post #38

So... >“It used to be the news channels were the callers,” said Kane. “They used to be the final say in big events. Like this officially happened because CNN and Fox News said so. But thanks to Polymarket, there’s a new signal.” This is interesting because of this: >At the moment, when there is a dispute, markets on Polymarket are settled by an anonymous group of people who hold a crypto token called UMA. [...] >It i…

No. These resolvers only deal with rules disputes, i.e. disputes over the fine print. This is only applicable if you are gambling on polymarket. The probabilities while the market is open are set by market forces.

Of course you have to read the fine print very carefully to understand what a particular market is about.

The more deceptive thing is the potential disparity between the title and the rules. Most market participants read the rules closely (although some do not), and so the title + headline probabilities may be not as they seem.

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#42

Post by ModernMech »

PowerElectronix wrote: post #28
ModernMech wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but capitalism eventually makes gambling the whole economy.

I don't think it does. Capitalism only allows one to save one's fruit of their labor to use down the line. You exchange it for money, then use that money to buy other stuff. People using it to gamble has more to do with gambling people than with capitalism people. You can have gambling in communism or socialism, only stakes there are limited because the fruit of the labor of people doesn't belong to them like in capi…

Look around you, the economy is aligning itself entirely around gambling. From bitcoin to nfts to the stock market to AI to art to dating apps to social media feeds to video games to venture capital to literal gambling apps infesting our phones ads sports. And finally we have actual members of the government gambling on policy.

The capitalism you grew up with is dead, the arguments for and against it are old and stale. That nature of what it is has changed. It's metastasized, devolved into something else entirely as the middle class is evaporating, the lower class is continually squeezed, billionaires become trillionaires, people are lighting warehouses on fire citing low wages as the proximal cause, and the President is ordering automatic SS registration as he threatens total civilization destruction.

This shit is not working and it's only going to get worse.

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#43

Post by nunez »

Not a new phenomenon! It happened during the War on Iraq. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/02/weekinreview/you-can-bet-...

People will bet on absolutely anything; gambling is as old as time itself.

> Wagering was generally legal under British common law, so long as it did not to lead to immortality or impolity.13 Bets about the outcome of events in war, over the death of political leaders, over court cases, or between voters over election results were illegal on these grounds.14 In the Victorian and Edwardian periods, the British government increasingly attempted to limit gambling, especially among the working classes. The Gaming Act of 1845 made gambling contracts and debts unenforceable in court (but otherwise liberalized what amounts could be wagered); the Betting Houses Act of 1853 outlawed the operation of betting establishments other than private clubs; the Betting Houses Act of 1874 cracked down of the advertisement of wagering; and the Street Betting Act of 1906 made acceptance of wagers in streets and public places illegal.15 Despite the legal uncertainty in the late 19th and early 20th century, the Fleet Street press reported on election wagering at the London Stock Exchange and at Lloyd’s in markets for Parliamentary “majorities.” [^0]

[^0] Rhode, Paul W. “The Long History of Political Betting Markets.” KU School of Business, 2012 March. https://users.wfu.edu/strumpks/papers/Int_Election_Betting_F...

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#44

Post by bendtb »

Throaway199999 wrote: post #14
Chrisszz wrote: post #4

This is becoming the kind of "VC platform for online war investments". You: 1. Plan 2. Bet 3. Invest money upfront 4. Execute 5. Redeem your profits

honestly the profits aren't big enough when you can just go into business if you have that kind of influence

I would also argue that for a bet on war involving the United States, Middle East, Russia or China oil products are a better bet - and it is the world's second most liquid market after forex markets.

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#45

Post by UncleMeat »

airstrike wrote: post #17
cyanydeez wrote: post #2

'Capitalism': the inevitable reduction of all humanity to fungible currency

Capitalism is just a projection of our natural competition for scarce resources onto an economic system.

There is nothing natural about distributed ownership and abstract financialization.

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#46

Post by daveguy »

PowerElectronix wrote: post #6
Chrisszz wrote: post #4

This is becoming the kind of "VC platform for online war investments". You: 1. Plan 2. Bet 3. Invest money upfront 4. Execute 5. Redeem your profits

Now, can you find enough liquidity in the market to turn a profit? Can you find it before it becomes aparent something is off in the bet?

It's a 0-1 bet that resolves one way or the other. If you were able to place the bet, the liquidity is there. But, yeah, if you can't make the bet in the first place without significantly pushing the market then you won't make as much.

Prediction markets should not be legal.

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#47

Post by pigpop »

iso1631 wrote: post #25
logicchains wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please do share what capitalist country had a famine in the past century.

Niger springs to mind, massively capitalist with a lot of oil and mining

Massively capitalist in what way? They have a long history of price controls and nationalization and their current military junta is trying to nationalize the uranium industry. How could you even imagine a free market operating in a country that has a revolving door government that alternates between military dictatorships and transitional officials?

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#48

Post by ffsm8 »

azan_ wrote: post #9
Chrisszz wrote: post #4

This is becoming the kind of "VC platform for online war investments". You: 1. Plan 2. Bet 3. Invest money upfront 4. Execute 5. Redeem your profits

Could you explain what do you mean? What's the plan and execution here? Planning and executing invasion? If so, there are much better markets than polymarket for making such bets.

I understood the argument like this: If there is a bet going that a war doesn't start, and you're able to start said war... Then everyone betting on the war not starting is effectively providing venture capital funds for you to start that war.

So if eg. 20 mil is bet on it not starting, the actor holding the proverbial trigger only needs to "invest" sufficient funds to drain the bet and then capitalize on it by pulling the trigger, everyone being against it would've effectively invested into the war

The analogy breaks apart at VC, because they're expecting payout after successful funding, which this doesn't provide.

I think it's more like Kickstarter/crowdfunding for wars. Just as fucked up though

(The "start a war" setting I'm using here is just to illustrate the point. There are a lot more granular bets going on like (place) will be contested etc, effectively creating money pools for offensives)

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#49

Post by ModernMech »

azan_ wrote: post #30
ModernMech wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but capitalism eventually makes gambling the whole economy.

How?

Once the capitalists get enough control of the government they rig everything for themselves. In a capitalist system money is paramount and they have the most of it, so their opinion is regarded higher than everyone else's. Once capitalists rig the system for themselves, the only way to get ahead is just pure luck or connections. Sine not everyone can be connected, luck is all that's left for most people, so it becomes a huge part of economic activity along with whoring and warring. See Also: OnlyFans, and the Department of War.

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#50

Post by _alternator_ »

zarzavat wrote: post #41
arter45 wrote: post #38

So... >“It used to be the news channels were the callers,” said Kane. “They used to be the final say in big events. Like this officially happened because CNN and Fox News said so. But thanks to Polymarket, there’s a new signal.” This is interesting because of this: >At the moment, when there is a dispute, markets on Polymarket are settled by an anonymous group of people who hold a crypto token called UMA. [...] >It i…

No. These resolvers only deal with rules disputes, i.e. disputes over the fine print. This is only applicable if you are gambling on polymarket. The probabilities while the market is open are set by market forces. Of course you have to read the fine print very carefully to understand what a particular market is about. The more deceptive thing is the potential disparity between the title and the rules. Most market par…

I think GP is saying that, in principle, the UMA token holders can resolve a dispute any way they see fit, even if in practice it's resolved according to the rules. At the end of the day there is someone who has to arbitrate 'truth' for the purposes of payout.
Post reply on HN