I feel we need a term for these attempts to paint gambling as something other than gambling. Or just proper enforcement for gambling platforms like "prediction markets". Personally I find it disappointing to see so many people wasting their time on this stuff. I'm sure Coplan, for example, could be a productive member of society, but instead chooses to waste his time on stupid stuff like Polymarket.
The microstructure of wealth transfer in prediction markets
91–100 of 193 posts
Re: The microstructure of wealth transfer in prediction markets
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pizza orders are also an indicator https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_pizza_theory
The irony that operational national security would be greatly improved if only they maintained a well staffed and resourced government kitchen for the Pentagon, but won't for many silly reasons. Oh no, lots of people would have to sit on idle standby many times, or gov't employees would get free meals.
The Pentagon has a ton of restaurants inside. There's literally an official mall-style map of all of them right here, I count almost 30: https://www.whs.mil/Services-and-Information/DoDCC/
The pizza index is specifically about late-night pizza orders, when presumably most of those restaurants are closed (though some do appear to be open 24/7).
Re: The microstructure of wealth transfer in prediction markets
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a national security issue too. Somebody poor grunt who chose to earn a living by laboring (which has proven to be much less effective than being born with money) will be putting fuel in the bombers and thinking "I could just make an anonymous bet..." It's a national security issue. We saw this with the Venezuela attack. A flurry of trading and someone made $400,000 for placing a bet mere hours before the "surpri…
Wouldn't the counterargument to this be that if the poor grunt is willing to betray his country for money in the prediction market, he would also be willing to take money from enemy x to do the same thing? With the prediction market, there is a financial incentive for people on the opposite side of the bet being motivated to uncover the malfeasance.
I think doing war crimes is the real betrayal of the country. But we have a president who think his personal morality is superior to international law, ratified treaties (despite the supremacy clause) and so on. This is overtly and explicitly unconstitutional.
Re: The microstructure of wealth transfer in prediction markets
#94I hope we manage to leverage prediction markets to actually achieve goals rather than just making a casino out of it. For instance, if you spot malware in a commit you could bet heavily against it being merged, and that would attract the maintainers' attention, and they'll see what you see and not merge it, and you get paid for the code review--that money would come from whoever bet that it would get merged, which yo…
It’s not clear to me how you’d get anyone on the other side of that market. Anyone who is capable of understanding the wager would see the same thing you did, and not bet in its favour. Anyone who can’t understand the code will just pass the bet by and play some other market they do understand. The malware author is presumably not someone you can compel to do anything, never mind pay out a losing bet.
Re: The microstructure of wealth transfer in prediction markets
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Its the fact that it gives very powerful people a vehicle to make lobsided bets on outcomes they control. OK, and? The market is just paying them to make information about their decisions public.
Parent comment has a strong implication that the bets will impact their decisions, and invariably for the worse. If "Politician XYZ takes the day off and sits on the couch" were paying 100-1 odds, it wouldn't be such a big drama (although, again, the existence of the bet would still impact their behaviour)
Correct. I've always had a hard time getting my point phrased in a way that gets people to understand my point, but I'm baffled that people don't see an issue with creating something that says "Hey if you blow up these random people in Iran today you can make $50 million dollars and no one can punish you" and thinking its not a big fucking deal.
This also isn't a theoretical issue that may happen - it dissapoints me that very few people know this but - on October 10th when BTC fell from $122k to $104k because of a trump announcement, someone created a short position 30 minutes before Trump announced 100% tariffs on Chinese imports and profited $200M USD.
Re: The microstructure of wealth transfer in prediction markets
#96I mentioned this on a different post - the biggest problem with prediction markets is not the gambling or dumb people losing money. Its the fact that it gives very powerful people a vehicle to make lobsided bets on outcomes they control. A small example of this would be NFL / NBA Refs fixing playoff games with a bad call or two. This actually happened 20 years ago, an NBA ref went to prison over being bribed just $20…
That's the actual point. Everyone else is there to make money gambling, but the whole premise is to incentivize people with secret information to share it anonymously with the public, and take a reward for doing it. All without traceability or secret drops or whatever. POSIWID
> POSIWID
Everyone can make up a silly purpose.
Against POSIWID: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/come-on-obviously-the-purpo...
Re: The microstructure of wealth transfer in prediction markets
#97Has anyone noticed a lot of polymarket posts on their X (formerly known as twitter) feed claiming to be making a fortune? It makes me feel like its some kind of coordinated guerilla marketing scheme.
Re: The microstructure of wealth transfer in prediction markets
#98I hope we manage to leverage prediction markets to actually achieve goals rather than just making a casino out of it. For instance, if you spot malware in a commit you could bet heavily against it being merged, and that would attract the maintainers' attention, and they'll see what you see and not merge it, and you get paid for the code review--that money would come from whoever bet that it would get merged, which yo…
It’s not clear to me how you’d get anyone on the other side of that market. Anyone who is capable of understanding the wager would see the same thing you did, and not bet in its favour. Anyone who can’t understand the code will just pass the bet by and play some other market they do understand. The malware author is presumably not someone you can compel to do anything, never mind pay out a losing bet.
The way I imagined it, the maintainers wouldn't be considering a commit whose author was not willing to bet on its success.
This thought experiment took part in a world where the web was significantly worse than our own: hoards of malicious AI's and precious few humans trying to not be mistaken for a malicious AI. Of course a pre-existing trust relationship is much better, but ideally there'd be a way for untrusted authors to make it through to a real human somehow. Attaching money to the commit would be one way to do that.
Re: The microstructure of wealth transfer in prediction markets
#99I mentioned this on a different post - the biggest problem with prediction markets is not the gambling or dumb people losing money. Its the fact that it gives very powerful people a vehicle to make lobsided bets on outcomes they control. A small example of this would be NFL / NBA Refs fixing playoff games with a bad call or two. This actually happened 20 years ago, an NBA ref went to prison over being bribed just $20…
That's the actual point. Everyone else is there to make money gambling, but the whole premise is to incentivize people with secret information to share it anonymously with the public, and take a reward for doing it. All without traceability or secret drops or whatever. POSIWID
The market can only resolve based on public information, so it could only incentivize revealing information that is already destined to be imminently revealed. Furthermore, it doesn't incentivize sharing that information with enough lead time to actually take action based on that information; the opposite is actually true, insiders are incentivized to wait until just before the event to make their trade, meaning that the public gets no actionable information in practice. And that's assuming that you can distinguish an insider from someone lying for the sake of market manipulation.
Re: The microstructure of wealth transfer in prediction markets
#100I hope we manage to leverage prediction markets to actually achieve goals rather than just making a casino out of it. For instance, if you spot malware in a commit you could bet heavily against it being merged, and that would attract the maintainers' attention, and they'll see what you see and not merge it, and you get paid for the code review--that money would come from whoever bet that it would get merged, which yo…
Why not just bet heavily against and then inform maintainers? By just betting on it instead it makes you look like you, or someone you know planted the malware
That is what I meant to say, that you'd inform the maintainers along with your bet against the commit. In this thought experiment I assumed that the maintainers are already being spammed by AI so heavily that the bet is necessary to get their attention. (Neal Stephenson had something similar going in in Anathem, he called them "bogons".)
In the case where you're betting heavily in favor of a commit, maybe because you've reviewed it and think it's good, maybe because it contains malware you want to inject... you'd be attracting reviewer attention to that commit because if they can talk the maintainers out of it they end up with more of your money.
Probably the best strategy for a malicious committer would be to sneak through a low value nothing-to-see-here commit, because the low bet would not attract extra reviewer attention, so the maintainers have to set it high enough that it still incentivizes review.
I don't want to live in this world, by the way, I'm just afraid we might have to.