3 ms·

Looking past your "rah rah financialization" partisanship, one question: Why is a prediction market for replication per se more interesting than the existing m

Looking past your "rah rah financialization" partisanship, one question: Why is a prediction market for replication per se more interesting than the existing market of all the public companies who would be enriched / wiped out based on the result? (Note that "well, the effect would be too small" flips just as easily around to, the smaller markets are obviously way too noisy given what people are actually getting away with...)

alchemist1e9 3y ago
What are people getting away with exactly? Prediction markets more rapidly expose fraud and misinformation than without them. Generally the decision to list a market or contract is based on providing specific utility and information. They provide a better signal to noise and therefore provide risk management as well. The fact you believe markets are a “partisan” topic illustrates exactly the problem. They are objectively and scientifically an important and critical part of humanity, which isn’t taught. As I’ve said elsewhere there reason is obvious as in teaching such facts and information will require simultaneously teach about how horrific and harmful governments have been, and we know who won’t like that.
- morelisp 3y ago
  Exposing fraud you created the environment for is not particularly interesting.
  - alchemist1e9 3y ago
    Oh so fraudulent SC claims would have no better avenues without prediction markets? I’d argue they would have more and with more capacity not less!
  - jamilton 3y ago
    I don't understand, how do prediction markets create the environment for fraud?
concordDance 3y ago
More directly about the actual issues policy makers care about, so you lose less info to confounders.
- morelisp 3y ago
  Markets are perfect except when they don't capture "actual issues" and then you need different markets with different participants? How does this support market primacy?
zone411 3y ago
> Why is a prediction market for replication per se more interesting than the existing market of all the public companies who would be enriched / wiped out based on the result? If you knew precisely which companies would gain or lose, how much relative to their stock price, and all these companies were liquid and public, then maybe you could make this comparison. Even then, there'd be plenty of noise from unrelated factors. So, it's pretty clear why a prediction market is superior.

alchemist1e9 3y ago

What are people getting away with exactly? Prediction markets more rapidly expose fraud and misinformation than without them. Generally the decision to list a market or contract is based on providing specific utility and information. They provide a better signal to noise and therefore provide risk management as well. The fact you believe markets are a “partisan” topic illustrates exactly the problem. They are objectively and scientifically an important and critical part of humanity, which isn’t taught. As I’ve said elsewhere there reason is obvious as in teaching such facts and information will require simultaneously teach about how horrific and harmful governments have been, and we know who won’t like that.

morelisp 3y ago
Exposing fraud you created the environment for is not particularly interesting.
- alchemist1e9 3y ago
  Oh so fraudulent SC claims would have no better avenues without prediction markets? I’d argue they would have more and with more capacity not less!
- jamilton 3y ago
  I don't understand, how do prediction markets create the environment for fraud?

concordDance 3y ago

More directly about the actual issues policy makers care about, so you lose less info to confounders.

morelisp 3y ago
Markets are perfect except when they don't capture "actual issues" and then you need different markets with different participants? How does this support market primacy?

zone411 3y ago

> Why is a prediction market for replication per se more interesting than the existing market of all the public companies who would be enriched / wiped out based on the result? If you knew precisely which companies would gain or lose, how much relative to their stock price, and all these companies were liquid and public, then maybe you could make this comparison. Even then, there'd be plenty of noise from unrelated factors. So, it's pretty clear why a prediction market is superior.