3 ms·

Why does everything you don't like need to be banned? Downvoters: I really doubt that you actually successfully 100% banned anything in the history of technol

Why does everything you don't like need to be banned? Downvoters: I really doubt that you actually successfully 100% banned anything in the history of technology.

dwroberts 7mo ago
Why is everything you like protected from being banned?
pjc50 7mo ago
Prediction markets on death are an assassination market. That's why they're against the rules even on Polymarket and Kalshi. Prediction markets on terrorist attacks and wars are one step back from that, but similar negative side effects are possible. And, regardless of what people are betting on, the corruption incentive appears where it did not previously, resulting in things like this. (I don't think there's literally an Iranian missile operator opening Polymarket, taking out a position for "missile lands on Israel", and then pressing the launch button, but ultimately that's what uncensored markets with uncensored movement of money would enable)
epolanski 7mo ago
1. It's not something I don't like, it's something plain illegal in most of the world, including the US under the Dodd-Frank act, which the current executive has decided to not enforce. 2. The reason it is illegal it is beyond obvious: basic economics and game theory explain you how dangerous it is tying real world events with financial incentives.
- colesantiago 7mo ago
  Illegal or not, trying to ban it won't work. You'll just push it underground and it will get even worse. The cat is out of the bag.
  - mpalmer 7mo ago
    Defeatist nonsense, and wrong. The US was regulating this until Trump. A friendly regulatory environment is the only way paying out these bets at scale is possible. "Pushing it underground" discourages the majority of bettors from using it, and that is a good thing.
    - qsera 7mo ago
      >"Pushing it underground" discourages the majority of bettors from using it, and that is a good thing. But don't you think that will be the "good" majority? And the "bad" minority will continue using the underground version?
      - zbentley 7mo ago
        > the "bad" minority will continue using the underground version? …which they already did before this market was made mainstream.
      - orwin 7mo ago
        With way, way less money involved. Hence limiting the reach and power of this minority.
        qsera 7mo ago
        Yes, makes sense. But may be there is also an upside. May be it would actually cause the people to take notice of what is going on around them and actually starting to use their brains (to make predictions) instead of simply consuming 24x7 news.
        orwin 7mo ago
        I'd rather them playing chess or hell, Pokémon. Or reading books.
        qsera 7mo ago
mpalmer 7mo ago
Why do you apparently like a system that lets people bet on atrocities and then take steps to make said atrocities more likely?
- colesantiago 7mo ago
  And you think banning it would 100% work? and where did I say I liked it?
  - mpalmer 7mo ago
    I'm not responding to your gish gallop BS. Why do you (obviously) think betting markets are good?
    - colesantiago 7mo ago
      Are you able to point to where I explicitly said I liked it rather than putting words in my mouth to fit your narrative? Maybe you should calm down re-read the thread before you turn red hot with anger.
      - mpalmer 7mo ago
        You are either an unthinking contrarian, or you care deeply about the continued legality of Polymarket specifically, because your responses to the points being made against you are inane. "you're talking about death threats, those have happened before" I am talking about THESE death threats. THESE death threats would not have happened if it wasn't possible for any sociopath to stake a million bucks on an arbitrary event of journalist interest. that is why I am extremely comfortable never replying to you again. good luck on the next bridge burning.
        colesantiago 7mo ago
        And banning prediction markets altogether will make this all go away? You are very very naive. I am still waiting to see whether you can find if I explicitly liked it or not. If you can, see you tomorrow.
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
camgunz 7mo ago
This is an argument against all laws, which probably deserves more than a couple sentences.
applfanboysbgon 7mo ago
> I really doubt that you actually successfully 100% banned anything in the history of technology. Outlawing murder has not successfully eliminated 100% of murder. Do you even understand that you are openly advocating that we repeal murder laws, and indeed the concept of law altogether?

Why does everything you don't like need to be banned? Downvoters: I really doubt that you actually successfully 100% banned anything in the history of technology.

dwroberts 7mo ago

Why is everything you like protected from being banned?

pjc50 7mo ago

Prediction markets on death are an assassination market. That's why they're against the rules even on Polymarket and Kalshi. Prediction markets on terrorist attacks and wars are one step back from that, but similar negative side effects are possible. And, regardless of what people are betting on, the corruption incentive appears where it did not previously, resulting in things like this. (I don't think there's literally an Iranian missile operator opening Polymarket, taking out a position for "missile lands on Israel", and then pressing the launch button, but ultimately that's what uncensored markets with uncensored movement of money would enable)

epolanski 7mo ago

1. It's not something I don't like, it's something plain illegal in most of the world, including the US under the Dodd-Frank act, which the current executive has decided to not enforce. 2. The reason it is illegal it is beyond obvious: basic economics and game theory explain you how dangerous it is tying real world events with financial incentives.

colesantiago 7mo ago
Illegal or not, trying to ban it won't work. You'll just push it underground and it will get even worse. The cat is out of the bag.
- mpalmer 7mo ago
  Defeatist nonsense, and wrong. The US was regulating this until Trump. A friendly regulatory environment is the only way paying out these bets at scale is possible. "Pushing it underground" discourages the majority of bettors from using it, and that is a good thing.
  - qsera 7mo ago
    >"Pushing it underground" discourages the majority of bettors from using it, and that is a good thing. But don't you think that will be the "good" majority? And the "bad" minority will continue using the underground version?
    - zbentley 7mo ago
      > the "bad" minority will continue using the underground version? …which they already did before this market was made mainstream.
    - orwin 7mo ago
      With way, way less money involved. Hence limiting the reach and power of this minority.
      - qsera 7mo ago
        Yes, makes sense. But may be there is also an upside. May be it would actually cause the people to take notice of what is going on around them and actually starting to use their brains (to make predictions) instead of simply consuming 24x7 news.
        orwin 7mo ago
        I'd rather them playing chess or hell, Pokémon. Or reading books.
        qsera 7mo ago

mpalmer 7mo ago

Why do you apparently like a system that lets people bet on atrocities and then take steps to make said atrocities more likely?

colesantiago 7mo ago
And you think banning it would 100% work? and where did I say I liked it?
- mpalmer 7mo ago
  I'm not responding to your gish gallop BS. Why do you (obviously) think betting markets are good?
  - colesantiago 7mo ago
    Are you able to point to where I explicitly said I liked it rather than putting words in my mouth to fit your narrative? Maybe you should calm down re-read the thread before you turn red hot with anger.
    - mpalmer 7mo ago
      You are either an unthinking contrarian, or you care deeply about the continued legality of Polymarket specifically, because your responses to the points being made against you are inane. "you're talking about death threats, those have happened before" I am talking about THESE death threats. THESE death threats would not have happened if it wasn't possible for any sociopath to stake a million bucks on an arbitrary event of journalist interest. that is why I am extremely comfortable never replying to you again. good luck on the next bridge burning.
      - colesantiago 7mo ago
        And banning prediction markets altogether will make this all go away? You are very very naive. I am still waiting to see whether you can find if I explicitly liked it or not. If you can, see you tomorrow.

deleted 7mo ago

[deleted]

camgunz 7mo ago

This is an argument against all laws, which probably deserves more than a couple sentences.

applfanboysbgon 7mo ago

> I really doubt that you actually successfully 100% banned anything in the history of technology. Outlawing murder has not successfully eliminated 100% of murder. Do you even understand that you are openly advocating that we repeal murder laws, and indeed the concept of law altogether?