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

61–70 of 138 posts

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#61

Post by miki123211 »

jancsika wrote: post #39
cyanydeez wrote: post #2

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

Is that necessarily true? E.g., suppose I'm grocery shopping online and get put in behavioral histogram bin #1. You're in bin #2 because of stuff like impulsive browsing habits and low battery. Your bin's price for chips is consequently x% more expensive than mine. Now, suppose both of us get separate uber rides from the same location. Similar data bins end up with your low battery generating y% higher price for your…

The truth is, price differentiation is something we've been doing for centuries, just with much worse heuristics.

People are triggered when you frame it in terms of one cohort paying more than the rest. However, if there's a sticker price that basically nobody pays, with most customers getting a discount based on how rich the heuristics say they are, that's suddenly fine.

Transit tickets work this way in most of Europe. There is a sticker price, but most people don't pay the sticker price. In practice, most tickets are purchased by school children, university students, seniors etc, and they all have varying levels of discounts. Whether you think of it as a "student discount" or as a "probably-rich-person surcharge", it doesn't really matter, in the end, the result is the same. Same applies to cinemas, museums, amusement parks. Here, you even have some grocery store chains that give you discounts if you have a "large family card."

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#62

Post by falcor84 »

nullstyle wrote: post #54
falcor84 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You make it sound bad, but I personally am very much in favor of regular people having access to the same bad things that the people in charge have.

You think normal folks should have access to precision guided munitions and chemical weapons?

Look, I don't think people should have access to these at all, but at the same time, I think that the average Joe would be a better custodian of these than Trump and Netanyahu.

My hope is that equal access might make us stop treating these things as if they are ok.

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#65

Post by miki123211 »

forinti wrote: post #18
croes wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Capitalism neither prevents gulags nor famines. And you can bet (pun intended) someone will create them on purpose if they can make profit from it

Doesn't the US already have an above average incarceration rate and private prisons? Maybe, just maybe, there's some relation?

The concept of private prisons basically proves why people who don't understand capitalism shouldn't engage in it.

The entire advantage of capitalism over socialism is that customer choice forces you to make better products, and everything else stems from that. If you only have one grocery store, one school system, one health insurer, one employer in town, it doesn't matter how bad they get, you'll be their slave forever. This is particularly true if the person making the decisions at those institutions doesn't profit from them doing well.

In a private prison system, there's no choice, you can't just switch prisons if you don't like the one you're in. This is the worst system of all, as there's still the profit incentive, without competition keeping it in check.

I think you could do a private prison system well. Maybe let the prisoners choose their prison, with major disincentives for prison owners if prisoners escape. Maybe pay them for every day their newly-released inmates stay out of jail, encouraging rehab programs that actually work. Those would align what's good for the owner with what's good for society, which is all that capitalism is ultimately all about.

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#66

Post by elicash »

nunez wrote: post #43

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…

Your comment is a great addition to the conversation. I do just want to add the scale point, though. That source is less than a million was bet, and now there are hundreds of millions bet on the ceasefire, and millions more on other Iran bets, and then even more bet on Russia/Ukraine.

So I think it's a bit overstated to frame it as nothing is new. But your historical context is helpful.

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#67

Post by miltonlost »

nunez wrote: post #43

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…

Still isn't something we should allow legally at scale on a public website. IS != OUGHT

Murder is also old as time itself! Guess we just gotta let it happen!

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#68

Post by rayiner »

elicash wrote: post #66
nunez wrote: post #43

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…

Your comment is a great addition to the conversation. I do just want to add the scale point, though. That source is less than a million was bet, and now there are hundreds of millions bet on the ceasefire, and millions more on other Iran bets, and then even more bet on Russia/Ukraine. So I think it's a bit overstated to frame it as nothing is new. But your historical context is helpful.

> That source is less than a million was bet, and now there are hundreds of millions bet on the ceasefire, and millions more on other Iran bets, and then even more bet on Russia/Ukraine.

I'd imagine those numbers are typical for any transaction facilitated by the Internet comparing 2003 to 2026.

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#69

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

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

Giving people an easy way to profit (i.e. incentive) to use either direct political power or indirect power via bribes is going to have massive consequences on corruption.

We've made profiting off of corruption substantially easier. Anyone who thinks that isn't going to increase corruption is a moron.

Anyone who thinks having more corruption is a good thing is also a moron.

Re: Polymarket gamblers betting millions on war

#70

Post by ks2048 »

paulnpace wrote: post #22
srameshc wrote: post #3

> There is now more than $500,000 (£371,000) staked on whether Russia will capture Kostyantynivka this year . Now everyone has a chance to profit from war ! Thank you Polymarket

War profiteering for the people!

Lots of publicly traded war profiteering companies. The president even highlighted one a couple of days ago.
Post reply on HN