5 ms·

I absolutely hate the election betting markets. They seem so un-American. It was only made legal in the USA last month, so all of the results so far have been f

I absolutely hate the election betting markets. They seem so un-American. It was only made legal in the USA last month, so all of the results so far have been foreign entities. Hate it.

paulgb 2y ago
FWIW, Polymarket is still technically not available from within the US, although since it’s crypto I imagine that’s not an insurmountable geoblock.
- tim333 2y ago
  I've been using it from the UK where it's also technically not available and it's trivial to get around. You just have to turn on a vpn to click the bet button.
  - coconoconut 2y ago
    Polymarket was set up by Thiel to manipulate perception on election. Don't arbitrage it's overly high Trump prediction because he won't pay out for Kamala.
    - tdeck 2y ago
      I do wonder what happens if they don't pay our. If it's not legal in the US, what's your recourse?
      - tim333 2y ago
        I believe it's all web3 smart contracts so they don't have the option to not pay out. They have an 'oracle' call the bets. Vitalik Buterin is an investor so I'm guessing the tech works. You can actually get your money back at any point by selling in the market - I bailed on my Kamala bet when the results started coming in. If you leave it to resolve it goes to the oracle which is a kind of voting mechanism https://docs.uma.xyz/protocol-overview/how-does-umas-oracle-work https://docs.uma.xyz/protocol-overview/how-does-umas-oracle-... Aside from gambling being iffy I'm quite impressed they've actually got the tech to work quite smoothly. There was talk of oracles and smart contracts for years and it never really worked much but this seems to be quite fast, cheap and secure.
- tdeck 2y ago
  Thats funny because I just saw an enormous video billboard ad for Polymarket in Philadelphia.
seanw444 2y ago
> betting > un-American
- dcrazy 2y ago
  Sports gambling itself was illegal in most of America until the Supreme Court decided Murphy v. NCAA in 2018. The entirety of the legalized sports betting industry has emerged from essentially nothing and embedded itself thoroughly in the national sports psyche in the span of six years.
  - password4321 2y ago
    Nearly 1200 comments last month: Legalizing sports gambling was a mistake https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41659458 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41659458
  - linotype 2y ago
    I feel so bad for kids growing up watching sports now. The beer commercials were bad enough, now kids are going to grow up to be gambling addicts too.
    - mrguyorama 2y ago
      "Video Games", I mean, digital slot machines with a game on the side was doing this just fine before sports gambling was legalized. Hell, even Lego is in on the Gacha action! Gambling is too profitable an endeavor to allow in a market economy. It only serves to snuff out all the oxygen for less scummy business.
      - Nasrudith 2y ago
        I don't think lowering the profit margins of gambling would make the issue much better given the problems are in the externalities and non-rational acting of the gambler. Outside of perhaps very "technically correct" and restrictive, like literally restricting people to nickle bets per game, in which case time would probably be the bottleneck to financial ruination (leaving only time-consumption life ruination) and probably would drive gambling underground.
reverius42 2y ago
I actually think we should ban polling, too. Make the election about getting the message out and convincing people, not about a horse race between two numbers.
- CobrastanJorji 2y ago
  Could be a good idea, but I suspect asking people what they think about political candidates enjoys such core first amendment protection that banning it would require amending the Constitution. And practically, nobody in power will want to ban them because they're a tool for staying in power. Same reason that we'll probably always have a two party system.
- 11101010001100 2y ago
  [flagged]
- Krssst 2y ago
  In a one-turn voting system, polls are very useful as a kind of "turn zero". The important point is that one should always tell the poller who they actually want to vote for (a possible third candidate) so that if this candidate actually stands a chance it can be seen in the poll and be voted for. In the actual election, if you see your third candidate has no chance you can vote for someone that can actually win. Changing the voting system seems much more important than trying to mess with the polls. However, regulating polls to enforce their trustworthiness is probably a good idea since they may have so much power. In France the presidential election is two-turns and even then I think we need polls since there are so many candidates in the first turn diluting votes.
  - jfengel 2y ago
    The US is really a two-turn voting system. The first turn is the primaries. It's quite different from the French presidential election, but the first round is open to all candidates. A non-aligned candidate would have to formally join a party to run for the nomination, but that's a matter of paperwork, not ideology. If they win office, they owe the party no obligations at all. The French system may well be preferable, but the American system really does have more opportunities for non-aligned candidates than people realize. They tend to dismiss the primaries as unimportant, but they really are a first round of voting -- that's why they're called "primary". Anybody who wants influence can start there, rather than jumping straight into the general election.
swyx 2y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalshi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalshi is a nyc company i believe
- youniverse 2y ago
  Here's a very interesting interview with the Kalshi founder to get his takes on many things people are talking about. https://youtu.be/atGcvlEO4qU https://youtu.be/atGcvlEO4qU Stuff they talk about include: - 90% male bias on Kalshi. - Polymarket is all crypto so that probably introduces bias. - He says 60/40 is still a coin flip. - Prediction markets are just another sentiment tracker, that the 60/40 is still a coin flip race.
lettergram 2y ago
It's 100% American and has been a thing forever. It's also a free speech argument, I should be able to bet on outcomes of events. It was common all throughout US history https://users.wfu.edu/strumpks/papers/Int_Election_Betting_Formatted_FINAL_NoComments.pdf https://users.wfu.edu/strumpks/papers/Int_Election_Betting_F...
- bbor 2y ago
  Fascinating, thanks for sharing! It should probably be highlighted tho that there were absolutely waves of relative interest (~1790-1840 and ~1890-1910, at least), and it was outlawed almost everywhere by the mid 1800s, which obviously means it primarily fell to the rich and well-connected. Ditto in Britain — they had bets, but; 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. In the Victorian and Edwardian periods, the British government increasingly attempted to limit gambling, especially among the working classes. So I’d argue it’s more like “a persistent scourge threatening democracy” than “a treasured ideal of free speech”. But I’m biased against all forms of gambling, so might have skimmed it unfairly. Worth a read, for sure!
Dig1t 2y ago
There’s evidence that they have done, and currently do, a better job predicting election outcomes than polling. Are you sure you don’t like them just because they are currently predicting the person that you don’t like is going to win the US election? https://repository.arizona.edu/bitstream/handle/10150/666656/azu_etd_hr_2021_0133_sip1_m.pdf?sequence=1 https://repository.arizona.edu/bitstream/handle/10150/666656... https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0261379412000467 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S02613...
coconoconut 2y ago
[dead]

I absolutely hate the election betting markets. They seem so un-American. It was only made legal in the USA last month, so all of the results so far have been foreign entities. Hate it.

paulgb 2y ago

FWIW, Polymarket is still technically not available from within the US, although since it’s crypto I imagine that’s not an insurmountable geoblock.

tim333 2y ago
I've been using it from the UK where it's also technically not available and it's trivial to get around. You just have to turn on a vpn to click the bet button.
- coconoconut 2y ago
  Polymarket was set up by Thiel to manipulate perception on election. Don't arbitrage it's overly high Trump prediction because he won't pay out for Kamala.
  - tdeck 2y ago
    I do wonder what happens if they don't pay our. If it's not legal in the US, what's your recourse?
    - tim333 2y ago
      I believe it's all web3 smart contracts so they don't have the option to not pay out. They have an 'oracle' call the bets. Vitalik Buterin is an investor so I'm guessing the tech works. You can actually get your money back at any point by selling in the market - I bailed on my Kamala bet when the results started coming in. If you leave it to resolve it goes to the oracle which is a kind of voting mechanism https://docs.uma.xyz/protocol-overview/how-does-umas-oracle-work https://docs.uma.xyz/protocol-overview/how-does-umas-oracle-... Aside from gambling being iffy I'm quite impressed they've actually got the tech to work quite smoothly. There was talk of oracles and smart contracts for years and it never really worked much but this seems to be quite fast, cheap and secure.
tdeck 2y ago
Thats funny because I just saw an enormous video billboard ad for Polymarket in Philadelphia.

seanw444 2y ago

> betting > un-American

dcrazy 2y ago
Sports gambling itself was illegal in most of America until the Supreme Court decided Murphy v. NCAA in 2018. The entirety of the legalized sports betting industry has emerged from essentially nothing and embedded itself thoroughly in the national sports psyche in the span of six years.
- password4321 2y ago
  Nearly 1200 comments last month: Legalizing sports gambling was a mistake https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41659458 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41659458
- linotype 2y ago
  I feel so bad for kids growing up watching sports now. The beer commercials were bad enough, now kids are going to grow up to be gambling addicts too.
  - mrguyorama 2y ago
    "Video Games", I mean, digital slot machines with a game on the side was doing this just fine before sports gambling was legalized. Hell, even Lego is in on the Gacha action! Gambling is too profitable an endeavor to allow in a market economy. It only serves to snuff out all the oxygen for less scummy business.
    - Nasrudith 2y ago
      I don't think lowering the profit margins of gambling would make the issue much better given the problems are in the externalities and non-rational acting of the gambler. Outside of perhaps very "technically correct" and restrictive, like literally restricting people to nickle bets per game, in which case time would probably be the bottleneck to financial ruination (leaving only time-consumption life ruination) and probably would drive gambling underground.

reverius42 2y ago

I actually think we should ban polling, too. Make the election about getting the message out and convincing people, not about a horse race between two numbers.

CobrastanJorji 2y ago
Could be a good idea, but I suspect asking people what they think about political candidates enjoys such core first amendment protection that banning it would require amending the Constitution. And practically, nobody in power will want to ban them because they're a tool for staying in power. Same reason that we'll probably always have a two party system.
11101010001100 2y ago
[flagged]
Krssst 2y ago
In a one-turn voting system, polls are very useful as a kind of "turn zero". The important point is that one should always tell the poller who they actually want to vote for (a possible third candidate) so that if this candidate actually stands a chance it can be seen in the poll and be voted for. In the actual election, if you see your third candidate has no chance you can vote for someone that can actually win. Changing the voting system seems much more important than trying to mess with the polls. However, regulating polls to enforce their trustworthiness is probably a good idea since they may have so much power. In France the presidential election is two-turns and even then I think we need polls since there are so many candidates in the first turn diluting votes.
- jfengel 2y ago
  The US is really a two-turn voting system. The first turn is the primaries. It's quite different from the French presidential election, but the first round is open to all candidates. A non-aligned candidate would have to formally join a party to run for the nomination, but that's a matter of paperwork, not ideology. If they win office, they owe the party no obligations at all. The French system may well be preferable, but the American system really does have more opportunities for non-aligned candidates than people realize. They tend to dismiss the primaries as unimportant, but they really are a first round of voting -- that's why they're called "primary". Anybody who wants influence can start there, rather than jumping straight into the general election.

swyx 2y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalshi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalshi is a nyc company i believe

youniverse 2y ago
Here's a very interesting interview with the Kalshi founder to get his takes on many things people are talking about. https://youtu.be/atGcvlEO4qU https://youtu.be/atGcvlEO4qU Stuff they talk about include: - 90% male bias on Kalshi. - Polymarket is all crypto so that probably introduces bias. - He says 60/40 is still a coin flip. - Prediction markets are just another sentiment tracker, that the 60/40 is still a coin flip race.

lettergram 2y ago

It's 100% American and has been a thing forever. It's also a free speech argument, I should be able to bet on outcomes of events. It was common all throughout US history https://users.wfu.edu/strumpks/papers/Int_Election_Betting_Formatted_FINAL_NoComments.pdf https://users.wfu.edu/strumpks/papers/Int_Election_Betting_F...

bbor 2y ago
Fascinating, thanks for sharing! It should probably be highlighted tho that there were absolutely waves of relative interest (~1790-1840 and ~1890-1910, at least), and it was outlawed almost everywhere by the mid 1800s, which obviously means it primarily fell to the rich and well-connected. Ditto in Britain — they had bets, but; 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. In the Victorian and Edwardian periods, the British government increasingly attempted to limit gambling, especially among the working classes. So I’d argue it’s more like “a persistent scourge threatening democracy” than “a treasured ideal of free speech”. But I’m biased against all forms of gambling, so might have skimmed it unfairly. Worth a read, for sure!

Dig1t 2y ago

There’s evidence that they have done, and currently do, a better job predicting election outcomes than polling. Are you sure you don’t like them just because they are currently predicting the person that you don’t like is going to win the US election? https://repository.arizona.edu/bitstream/handle/10150/666656/azu_etd_hr_2021_0133_sip1_m.pdf?sequence=1 https://repository.arizona.edu/bitstream/handle/10150/666656... https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0261379412000467 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S02613...

coconoconut 2y ago

[dead]