8 ms·

Bets on US-Iran ceasefire show signs of insider knowledge, say experts

193 points by trocado 6mo ago

Insanity 6mo ago
Highly skeptical of using a betting platform as an indication of insider knowledge and something to base your decisions off of. People will bet, and it's a 50/50 decision between "ceasfire yes / no". People vote with their gut.
- mothballed 6mo ago
  A few major actors in predictions markets (1) Recreational or addicted gamblers (2) Hedging your investments or exposure to an event by betting on it as insurance (3) Insiders (4) Information arbitrage (researchers, etc) Three (3) and Four (4) are probably the most important for conveying useful information in pricing. I see it as a good, not bad thing, they are involved.
  - Insanity 6mo ago
    mh. Guess my view of betting is too naive. I wouldn't have expected anything beyond (1). With my usual addictive behaviour, I think it's prob best I stay away from that though.. :)
    - cwillu 6mo ago
      (1) provides an incentive for the rest to participate.
  - CaptainNegative 6mo ago
    There could also be some degree of "(5) bandwagon effect" players, who pump money into an outcome specifically to get people talking about its possibility, thereby increasing its probability of coming into fruition.
  - freejazz 6mo ago
    Can anyone point to any instance of anyone benefitting from the information conveyed in these prediction markets?
- deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
- munk-a 6mo ago
  I would be too - if we didn't have prior evidence of massive insider trading on prediction markets.
  - nostromo 6mo ago
    Insider trading makes prediction markets more accurate, not less.
    - munk-a 6mo ago
      It also warps reality to adhere to the prediction markets. There was a famous rash of objects being thrown onto WNBA courts recently that was spurred on by the potential for financial gain.
- a_ba 6mo ago
  Just because it's a binary choice doesn't make it a 50/50 chance. Flipping a fair coin (50/50) is different from flipping a weighted coin (say 80/20) even though the possible outcomes are the same.
  - Insanity 6mo ago
    No, but I'm just saying, people vote based on feels.
    - croes 6mo ago
      Insiders don‘t and you’re ignoring the reasons why insider trading is suspected. It’s not because they bet, because how and when they bet
    - gzread 6mo ago
      Yes, and they consistently lose money to insiders who vote based on actual knowledge.
- standardUser 6mo ago
  There's an entire academic field called statistics you seem to be forgetting all about.
spwa4 6mo ago
For most people, that's a plus of course.
petesergeant 6mo ago
I would be interested to know who shorted oil in the hours before the purported negotiations post on Truth Social, and who then went long on it in shortly after the price readjusted and before the Iranians denied these negotiations.
nis0s 6mo ago
It’s likely a misdirection, it’s hard to say what might happen. It might not even be five days wait.
exe34 6mo ago
It's pretty clear, the US only carries out war on weekends, while markets sleep.
CrzyLngPwd 6mo ago
Wasn't there a flurry of market activity moments before Trump announced discussions between Iran and the USA, but such discussions never happened, or as Trump said, happened with someone he didn't want to name to protect them, which meant they were clearly not a decision maker in Iran - all of which was denied by Iran. What if everything Trump does and says is merely to manipulate markets?
tmnvix 6mo ago
> “For the purposes of this market, an ‘official ceasefire agreement’ requires clear public confirmation from both the United States government and the government of Iran that they have agreed to halt military hostilities against one another.” (by March 31) Seems a rather risky bet considering how deep Israel has ventured into its war in Lebanon. Very doubtful they will stop anytime soon. Given the leverage Israel has demonstrated over US foreign policy I find it hard to imagine that the US will 'leave them to it'. Likewise, Iran is unlikely to leave Hezbollah's interests out of any negotiations or for that matter to trust that the US isn't asking for negotiations in bad faith. I guess there could be a limited ceasefire agreed between Iran and the US to make room for negotiations but the ceasefire would almost certainly have to occur without the opening of the strait or an end to fighting in Lebanon. This (now regional) war has a long way to go in my opinion. Ultimately, I think this all hinges on whether or not the Iranians feel that they have enough leverage to exercise yet. My feeling is that they will want to continue to the point of destroying Trump's political career - something they could possibly do if this quagmire continues to get worse and closer to the US midterms. Bringing down a US president is potentially one way they can help ensure that they don't simply get attacked again in the near future.
- TitaRusell 6mo ago
  There was an interesting article in a local paper here about non zionist Jews emigrating from Israel. There are no missiles and draft in Western Europe and the shops are open on every holy day. Unfortunately this leaves the holy land to the fanatics.
  - fakedang 6mo ago
    Non-zionist Jews have been leaving Israel whenever the opportunity rose. This war was just an accelerant for further emigration. The only ones who choose to stay back are folks fresh into Aliyah, who might've received a lot of incentives from the government to settle in the illegal West Bank settlements. Or those who really believe in Zionism. The former are typically guys who couldn't make the cut even in their home countries, so they're certainly not adequate replacements for the ones leaving. Not to mention, it's mostly the liberal cities like Tel Aviv which have faced the brunt of Iranian barrages. Jerusalem has been barely hit. Folks staying in those cities, working actual jobs contributing to the economy and not Torah studies, are likely the ones leaving - I know many of my acquaintances who've left Tel Aviv for the US or Dubai.
mikkupikku 6mo ago
If the administration decides to end this stupid war just so they can cash out some profitable bets... I don't even know what I would think. The whole thing is so stupid it makes my head hurt.
- delecti 6mo ago
  I think the main reason is that they were all too incompetent to realize what the effects of the war would be on the global financial system. The bets were probably just a happy opportunity for corruption. > The whole thing is so stupid it makes my head hurt Look on the bright side, at least the malicious actors aren't able to competently implement their goals.
  - huijzer 6mo ago
    When do we cross the barrier from incompetent to nefarious?
    - idle_zealot 6mo ago
      It's not an either-or question; they're very transparently both nefarious and incompetent.
      - edgyquant 6mo ago
        So what does that say about their opposition who lost all three branches of government to them?
        Tarsul 6mo ago
        Not nefarious enough?
        idle_zealot 6mo ago
        Populist evil polls better than technocratic evil.
        6mo ago
Karrot_Kream 6mo ago
Couldn't insiders just trade Brent Crude futures and do the same thing? There's more than enough liquidity in Brent that an insider can make great money.
- tencentshill 6mo ago
  A market with regulations, vs. no regulations.
  - Karrot_Kream 6mo ago
    Right so how are you going to find it and who is going to prosecute the insider trading here? My point isn't that an unregulated prediction market (Polymarket non-US markets are non-CFTC certified) can obscure insider trading. My point is that Brent has enough liquidity that an insider can trade without moving markets. There's plenty of insiders that work on a contract basis and aren't required to disclose trades by STOCK Act provisions for public disclosure. And honestly we aren't even out of the 45 day window around disclosures that would surface any Brent or WTI trades around the current Iran conflict anyway.
    - cosmojg 6mo ago
      Also, isn't insider trading the whole point of prediction markets? They were originally conceptualized as information aggregators.
      - kasey_junk 6mo ago
        People tend to use the term insider incorrectly. Even in cftc regulated markets it is unlikely that an admin official is an insider. What people are looking for is anti-corruption enforcement not market regulation. The problem isn’t that the admin is using advanced knowledge, all commodities trading involves that, it’s that the officials have an obligation to the public as part of their governmental service. Of course this admin _also_ gutted the anti-corruption offices in the government along with the market regulators.
      - 6mo ago
standardUser 6mo ago
There's something funny about watching global markets react to Trump's every lazy lie as if Moses himself just passed down orders. Maybe funny is the wrong word. The kicker is that this isn't even Trump's war and he likely lacks the capacity to end it if he wanted to.
- impure 6mo ago
  People want to believe this war will end soon.
- vkou 6mo ago
  > The kicker is that this isn't even Trump's war That's quite possible. > and he likely lacks the capacity to end it if he wanted to. Nah, he could end it any time he wants. Iran will stop bombing its neighbors in a week or so, and things will more or less return to the pre-war status quo. He chooses to not end it, because the one thing that he cannot stand is losing face.
  - standardUser 6mo ago
    Iran will not stop harassing the region, and perhaps not even allow the strait to open, if Israel is still bombing them or fighting a proxy war in Lebanon. So Trump can pack up and head back to this side of the planet, having made our country a few trillion dollars poorer in the process, but the war doesn't ends until Iran and Israel decide it ends.
    - vkou 6mo ago
      > Iran will not stop harassing the region, and perhaps not even allow the strait to open, if Israel is still bombing them or fighting a proxy war in Lebanon. If Israel is still bombing them? Certainly. This will put incredible international pressure on Israel to stop. It's one thing when the US wrecks the world's economy, and it's hard to push back on. It's an entirely different thing when a country of 10 million people is wrecking the world's economy. International opinion has been turning against it for years, already. I do think it's very unlikely to continue the war if the bombing stopped, and only the proxy war continued.
aaron695 6mo ago
[dead]
boramalper 6mo ago
> The wallets “definitely [look like] someone with some degree of inside info”, said Ben Yorke, formerly a researcher with CoinTelegraph, now building an AI trading platform called Starchild. Ben Yorke is the only expert I see mentioned in the article, so it'd be a lot more accurate (and a lot less sensational) if The Guardian changed its title to "... says one expert" (but it wouldn't sound as interesting then, would it?). > Eight accounts, all newly created around 21 March, bet a total of nearly $70,000 (£52,000) on there being a ceasefire. They stand to make nearly $820,000 if such a deal is reached before 31 March. Not to sound privileged but $800k doesn't sound like that much of money for someone that has access to that kind of insider knowledge, especially considering the risks. All things considered, I feel like the same people could make much bigger bets using trad-fi instruments than Polymarket so I don't understand what's so significant about Polymarket "whales". In the end people just betting on TACO.
- vkou 6mo ago
  > especially considering the risks. What risks? 1. This isn't insider trading of securities. 2. This administration is laughably corrupt.
- onetokeoverthe 6mo ago
  [dead]
- ajcp 6mo ago
  > $800k doesn't sound like that much of money for someone that has access to that kind of insider knowledge I think you over-estimate by a large margin how much congressional staffers and/or Pentagon employees make, many of whom could have access to this kind of information in the course of their duties.
- deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
- bethekidyouwant 6mo ago
  You don’t have to be an insider to know that the US wants to broker a peace deal now that they’ve gotten themselves deep in the shit. Also, how could a Washington insider know if a peace deal will actually be brokered they have to negotiate with the other party after all.
bjackman 6mo ago
What signs? This article is absolute slop (not AI, but slop). I do not have any reason to doubt that people are doing insider trading. The US admin is obviously corrupt and the Iran attacks are the most abject symptom of its corruption so far. But you can't just put out a bunch of completely isolated observations with zero analysis and say "that looks like insider trading". There is nothing at all in here that presents an argument for that claim. I am a daily Guardian reader but I stopped paying for it coz there are so many articles like this that are just complete fucking trash. Because I am the target audience (leftist Euro who can easily get riled up by topics like this) it pisses me off when I feel I'm being manipulated.
- bjackman 6mo ago
  Breakdown of the presented points: > Eight accounts, all newly created around 21 March, bet a total of nearly $70,000 (£52,000) on there being a ceasefire. Is that anomalous? Are these numbers large in context? > They stand to make nearly $820,000 if such a deal is reached before 31 March. Yes that is indeed how prediction markets work for unlikely events? > An account that made the same bet was created shortly before the US struck Iran on 28 February. It also placed a winning bet on those strikes, which raised similar questions around insider trading, and so far has bet on nothing else. Is that anomalous? If I was betting 5 figure sums I would also stick to my areas of expertise. That doesn't mean I'm an insider. > The new accounts all appear to have been created late last week, around the time when the US president, Donald Trump, appeared to first double down on war with Iran, then suggest in an after-markets Truth Social post that he was considering “winding down” military operations. So what??? Is anything about that anomalous? What is that supposed to tell us about the accounts? > The wallets “definitely [look like] someone with some degree of inside info”, said Ben Yorke, formerly a researcher with CoinTelegraph, now building an AI trading platform called Starchild. "Some random fucking guy said this thing", OK? > But online crypto watchers and experts suggested that the bets bore the signs of insider trading – both because they bought their positions at market price, What the fuck does that even mean? > and because some of the accounts looked like they could belong to a single investor attempting to conceal their identity by splitting their bet between multiple wallets. This is just repeating a former claim that was not backed up with any rationale. And note the very next sentence provides an alternative motive for traders to split wallets, aside from insider trading. > “Typically, when you see wallet-splitting and deliberate attempts to obfuscate identity, it’s one of two scenarios: either a very large investor trying to shield their position from market impact, or insider trading,” said Yorke. But we haven't been presented with any evidence that we're seeing either of those things?? And also I can't help repeating, why the fuck are we supposed to listen to this guy's opinion? > Polymarket’s own rating of the probability of a ceasefire before 31 March increased significantly in the past few days, from 6% on 21 March to 24% by Monday. More than $21m is currently being wagered on this outcome. Again, this is just describing the normal and intended mechanics of the market. It's not anomalous and it's not evidence of wrongdoing. Also it makes the $70k figure from the beginning look pretty small.
jmyeet 6mo ago
There are lists of the worst decisions of the Supreme Court in history (eg [1]). Dred Scott [2] often tops such lists. I believe that Trump v. United States [3] will go on such lists in the near future. Why? Because it opened the floodgates on corruption on a scale we previously haven't seen. The president has absolute immunity. The president's communications with the Attorney-General can't even be examined, basically. And there was absolutely no constitutional basis for it. The Court established a King. So the president has absolute immunity from any consequences. The president can pardon anyone in their orbit. Pardons are now being openly sold for personal profit [4]. All of this was completely foreseeable from giving someone absolute immunity. Prediction markets make this much worse because they're even more unregulated. We certainly had corruption even in Trump's first term (eg Jared Kushner's Saudi "investment" [5]). This is the new normal. [1]: https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/supreme-court/13-worst-supreme-court-decisions-of-all-time/ https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/supreme-court/13-worst-su... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_v._United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_v._United_States [4]: https://www.cato.org/blog/embarrassment-riches https://www.cato.org/blog/embarrassment-riches [5]: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68296877 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68296877
- pjc50 6mo ago
  Republicans spent about 40 years stacking the court with partisans in order to overturn Roe v Wade, and got the corruption as a bonus.
- dylan604 6mo ago
  > So the president has absolute immunity from any consequences. That's not true. Congress still has the power to impeach with the a conviction in the Senate removing the sitting president. The problem is that both chambers of Congress are lead by sycophants of the president. All SCOTUS did was put an asterisk to the notion that "no man above the law". It's a big fat asterisk to be sure, but they gave themselves a little wiggle room.
SilverElfin 6mo ago
Every single action taken under this administration has been either primarily for corrupt grifting or has been turned into that, to the benefit of the Trump family, their friends, and their donors. It’s ridiculous how open all of it is. And the people and companies benefiting from it are pretending like they’re not the bad guys.
- duderific 6mo ago
  In our current system, the only defenses against corruption: - Standards and norms, which obviously the current administration doesn't give a rat's ass about - Failing that, Congress has to step in and impeach and convict. This won't happen because the Republicans have completely rolled over So, here we are.
  - SilverElfin 6mo ago
    If there are no paths to retroactively investigating and clawing back every last penny, this just leads to taxpayers giving up paying taxes eventually. What’s the point of a fundamentally corrupt system just for the rich and connected?
ck2 6mo ago
There's no ceasefire, Iran has no idea what he is making up as always. He's delaying until the Marines get there in a few days. And until the markets close on Friday, notice how he said 5 days on Monday. He's also bombed them the past two times in the middle of negotiations, why stop now The man is a proven constant pathological liar since the day he came down the golden escalator 10 years ago, literally every time he speaks it's a lie.
- fakedang 6mo ago
  Iran already knows his bluff. Abbas Aragchi even explicitly mentioned this in an interview, stating that negotiating with the US is a pointless exercise, but it tells the Iranians whether Dump is planning a major strike. So there's definitely going to be a major strike happening by Friday or Saturday. To end the war, Iran will demand a full withdrawal of US forces from all neighboring countries as well as a shut down of US bases. This will also have the added benefit of giving them full control of the strait when the US leaves, and a free hand to bombard Israel. The GCC are already fatigued from a war they had no say in, so if the Iranians strike the desal plants, they will either join the US offensive or they'll kick the American troops out.
  - deleted 6mo ago
    [deleted]
mandeepj 6mo ago
Ceasefire alone? Seems like there was insider knowledge even on start of war bidding.
dylan604 6mo ago
As soon as the news hit that the Iranians are claiming they have not negotiated anything while Trump is claiming the supposed negotiations are why he's not bombing Iranian power infrastructure really made wonder who Trump is trying to fool. It reminds me of Musk's tweet about securing financing to go private. Comments like this are meant to move a needle.
871ajh-121 6mo ago
Trump always announces ceasefires, negotiations and "deals" when the other party doesn't even know about it. Or, in the middle of real negotiations, he attacks. This 5 day extension is to replenish US stocks and build up the marines in the region. while Israel continues to attack all the time. The only deal that may have emerged in secret is for Iran not to hit the Dimona nuclear power plant and for Israel/US not to hit the Bushehr nuclear power plant. Of course Trump's cronies will utilize the volatility and insider knowledge. The entire presidency is there to enrich his clan.
- XorNot 6mo ago
  He also does everything Friday after market close. As an Australian the next dumbest thing I've ever heard of reliably happens mid Saturday as a result. The "5 day extension" is coincidentally exactly that timeframe.
- netsharc 6mo ago
  But surprisingly the market see this bullshit and savors it, they went up, after all.. Are they operating on hopes and prayers that Trump isn't lying "this time"? Or does everybody know it's all crap but if everyone else is buying, they don't want to miss the tide?
b112 6mo ago
This is very weird. Trump is the ultimate mercurial. At the drop of a hat, he'll change his mind on things. Predicting Trump is a ridiculous proposition, and I'm willing to be most would agree with that. Even Trump doesn't know what Trump will do next! Yet meanwhile, there are people using "insider knowledge" to make decisions? What insider knowledge!! There is none. It's all made up on a day to day basis.
broof 6mo ago
Isn’t one of the points of betting markets is to incentivize this? Now me, as someone who doesn’t have access to insider knowledge, can know that there’s a noticeably increased chance of what’s going to happen. I do think maybe there should be some sort of feature to prevent last minute bets that utilizes insider knowledge, and I do admit there are considerable negative externalities to this system but it’s not clear to me that this is for sure bad.
- cj 6mo ago
  > Isn’t one of the points of betting markets is to incentivize this? No. It’s an unintended side effect that risks breaking trust in the system by (the majority of) players who don’t have insider knowledge.
  - phil21 6mo ago
    Eh what? It’s literally the only reason for prediction markets to exist. Otherwise they are simple gambling and pointless. The only way you get more wisdom from “the crowd” is if it teases folks who hold non-public (or at least less public) information into the market to refine the odds towards what they should be. Without insider information the entire concept is dead on arrival. Yes randos are gonna gamble because they either don’t understand the game they are playing or are simple degenerate gamblers who want something else to gamble on. Others are going to think they know better or have limited insider information that isn’t worth as much as they think, or is not as accurate as they believe. And the delusional who simply think they know better for no logical reason but have convinced themselves otherwise.
    - hatthew 6mo ago
      > Otherwise they are simple gambling maybe I'm dumb but I thought gambling is the whole point
      - olgkov 6mo ago
        It seems like two different definitions of 'point' are getting mixed. Yes, for many participants it feels like gambling. But structurally, prediction markets are closer to price discovery systems -like financial markets - where the side effect (or goal, depending on your view) is better forecasts, not just entertainment
journal 6mo ago
Trump says something the other side will say is false in one hour. So make all the money before the other side responds and markets correct? What happens when Trump makes the wrong move? Will his family be in debt for eternity?
varispeed 6mo ago
When the entire US administration is compromised by Russia, why wouldn't they want to milk it.
foxglacier 6mo ago
It's not a sign of insider trading that several people created accounts "around the time" Trump suggested winding down the war. It could have been after he publicly said that. This article is just made up crap fueling the FUD about government secrets being leaked by predictions markets.
deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]
cornstalks 6mo ago
Given the pause in hostilities announced today it certainly looks like insider knowledge: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116278232362967212 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/1162782323629...

193 points by trocado 6mo ago

Highly skeptical of using a betting platform as an indication of insider knowledge and something to base your decisions off of. People will bet, and it's a 50/50 decision between "ceasfire yes / no". People vote with their gut.

mothballed 6mo ago
A few major actors in predictions markets (1) Recreational or addicted gamblers (2) Hedging your investments or exposure to an event by betting on it as insurance (3) Insiders (4) Information arbitrage (researchers, etc) Three (3) and Four (4) are probably the most important for conveying useful information in pricing. I see it as a good, not bad thing, they are involved.
- Insanity 6mo ago
  mh. Guess my view of betting is too naive. I wouldn't have expected anything beyond (1). With my usual addictive behaviour, I think it's prob best I stay away from that though.. :)
  - cwillu 6mo ago
    (1) provides an incentive for the rest to participate.
- CaptainNegative 6mo ago
  There could also be some degree of "(5) bandwagon effect" players, who pump money into an outcome specifically to get people talking about its possibility, thereby increasing its probability of coming into fruition.
- freejazz 6mo ago
  Can anyone point to any instance of anyone benefitting from the information conveyed in these prediction markets?
deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]
munk-a 6mo ago
I would be too - if we didn't have prior evidence of massive insider trading on prediction markets.
- nostromo 6mo ago
  Insider trading makes prediction markets more accurate, not less.
  - munk-a 6mo ago
    It also warps reality to adhere to the prediction markets. There was a famous rash of objects being thrown onto WNBA courts recently that was spurred on by the potential for financial gain.
a_ba 6mo ago
Just because it's a binary choice doesn't make it a 50/50 chance. Flipping a fair coin (50/50) is different from flipping a weighted coin (say 80/20) even though the possible outcomes are the same.
- Insanity 6mo ago
  No, but I'm just saying, people vote based on feels.
  - croes 6mo ago
    Insiders don‘t and you’re ignoring the reasons why insider trading is suspected. It’s not because they bet, because how and when they bet
  - gzread 6mo ago
    Yes, and they consistently lose money to insiders who vote based on actual knowledge.
standardUser 6mo ago
There's an entire academic field called statistics you seem to be forgetting all about.

spwa4 6mo ago

For most people, that's a plus of course.

petesergeant 6mo ago

I would be interested to know who shorted oil in the hours before the purported negotiations post on Truth Social, and who then went long on it in shortly after the price readjusted and before the Iranians denied these negotiations.

nis0s 6mo ago

It’s likely a misdirection, it’s hard to say what might happen. It might not even be five days wait.

exe34 6mo ago

It's pretty clear, the US only carries out war on weekends, while markets sleep.

CrzyLngPwd 6mo ago

Wasn't there a flurry of market activity moments before Trump announced discussions between Iran and the USA, but such discussions never happened, or as Trump said, happened with someone he didn't want to name to protect them, which meant they were clearly not a decision maker in Iran - all of which was denied by Iran. What if everything Trump does and says is merely to manipulate markets?

tmnvix 6mo ago

> “For the purposes of this market, an ‘official ceasefire agreement’ requires clear public confirmation from both the United States government and the government of Iran that they have agreed to halt military hostilities against one another.” (by March 31) Seems a rather risky bet considering how deep Israel has ventured into its war in Lebanon. Very doubtful they will stop anytime soon. Given the leverage Israel has demonstrated over US foreign policy I find it hard to imagine that the US will 'leave them to it'. Likewise, Iran is unlikely to leave Hezbollah's interests out of any negotiations or for that matter to trust that the US isn't asking for negotiations in bad faith. I guess there could be a limited ceasefire agreed between Iran and the US to make room for negotiations but the ceasefire would almost certainly have to occur without the opening of the strait or an end to fighting in Lebanon. This (now regional) war has a long way to go in my opinion. Ultimately, I think this all hinges on whether or not the Iranians feel that they have enough leverage to exercise yet. My feeling is that they will want to continue to the point of destroying Trump's political career - something they could possibly do if this quagmire continues to get worse and closer to the US midterms. Bringing down a US president is potentially one way they can help ensure that they don't simply get attacked again in the near future.

TitaRusell 6mo ago
There was an interesting article in a local paper here about non zionist Jews emigrating from Israel. There are no missiles and draft in Western Europe and the shops are open on every holy day. Unfortunately this leaves the holy land to the fanatics.
- fakedang 6mo ago
  Non-zionist Jews have been leaving Israel whenever the opportunity rose. This war was just an accelerant for further emigration. The only ones who choose to stay back are folks fresh into Aliyah, who might've received a lot of incentives from the government to settle in the illegal West Bank settlements. Or those who really believe in Zionism. The former are typically guys who couldn't make the cut even in their home countries, so they're certainly not adequate replacements for the ones leaving. Not to mention, it's mostly the liberal cities like Tel Aviv which have faced the brunt of Iranian barrages. Jerusalem has been barely hit. Folks staying in those cities, working actual jobs contributing to the economy and not Torah studies, are likely the ones leaving - I know many of my acquaintances who've left Tel Aviv for the US or Dubai.

mikkupikku 6mo ago

If the administration decides to end this stupid war just so they can cash out some profitable bets... I don't even know what I would think. The whole thing is so stupid it makes my head hurt.

delecti 6mo ago
I think the main reason is that they were all too incompetent to realize what the effects of the war would be on the global financial system. The bets were probably just a happy opportunity for corruption. > The whole thing is so stupid it makes my head hurt Look on the bright side, at least the malicious actors aren't able to competently implement their goals.
- huijzer 6mo ago
  When do we cross the barrier from incompetent to nefarious?
  - idle_zealot 6mo ago
    It's not an either-or question; they're very transparently both nefarious and incompetent.
    - edgyquant 6mo ago
      So what does that say about their opposition who lost all three branches of government to them?
      - Tarsul 6mo ago
        Not nefarious enough?
      - idle_zealot 6mo ago
        Populist evil polls better than technocratic evil.
      - 6mo ago

Karrot_Kream 6mo ago

Couldn't insiders just trade Brent Crude futures and do the same thing? There's more than enough liquidity in Brent that an insider can make great money.

tencentshill 6mo ago
A market with regulations, vs. no regulations.
- Karrot_Kream 6mo ago
  Right so how are you going to find it and who is going to prosecute the insider trading here? My point isn't that an unregulated prediction market (Polymarket non-US markets are non-CFTC certified) can obscure insider trading. My point is that Brent has enough liquidity that an insider can trade without moving markets. There's plenty of insiders that work on a contract basis and aren't required to disclose trades by STOCK Act provisions for public disclosure. And honestly we aren't even out of the 45 day window around disclosures that would surface any Brent or WTI trades around the current Iran conflict anyway.
  - cosmojg 6mo ago
    Also, isn't insider trading the whole point of prediction markets? They were originally conceptualized as information aggregators.
    - kasey_junk 6mo ago
      People tend to use the term insider incorrectly. Even in cftc regulated markets it is unlikely that an admin official is an insider. What people are looking for is anti-corruption enforcement not market regulation. The problem isn’t that the admin is using advanced knowledge, all commodities trading involves that, it’s that the officials have an obligation to the public as part of their governmental service. Of course this admin _also_ gutted the anti-corruption offices in the government along with the market regulators.
    - 6mo ago

standardUser 6mo ago

There's something funny about watching global markets react to Trump's every lazy lie as if Moses himself just passed down orders. Maybe funny is the wrong word. The kicker is that this isn't even Trump's war and he likely lacks the capacity to end it if he wanted to.

impure 6mo ago
People want to believe this war will end soon.
vkou 6mo ago
> The kicker is that this isn't even Trump's war That's quite possible. > and he likely lacks the capacity to end it if he wanted to. Nah, he could end it any time he wants. Iran will stop bombing its neighbors in a week or so, and things will more or less return to the pre-war status quo. He chooses to not end it, because the one thing that he cannot stand is losing face.
- standardUser 6mo ago
  Iran will not stop harassing the region, and perhaps not even allow the strait to open, if Israel is still bombing them or fighting a proxy war in Lebanon. So Trump can pack up and head back to this side of the planet, having made our country a few trillion dollars poorer in the process, but the war doesn't ends until Iran and Israel decide it ends.
  - vkou 6mo ago
    > Iran will not stop harassing the region, and perhaps not even allow the strait to open, if Israel is still bombing them or fighting a proxy war in Lebanon. If Israel is still bombing them? Certainly. This will put incredible international pressure on Israel to stop. It's one thing when the US wrecks the world's economy, and it's hard to push back on. It's an entirely different thing when a country of 10 million people is wrecking the world's economy. International opinion has been turning against it for years, already. I do think it's very unlikely to continue the war if the bombing stopped, and only the proxy war continued.

aaron695 6mo ago

[dead]

boramalper 6mo ago

> The wallets “definitely [look like] someone with some degree of inside info”, said Ben Yorke, formerly a researcher with CoinTelegraph, now building an AI trading platform called Starchild. Ben Yorke is the only expert I see mentioned in the article, so it'd be a lot more accurate (and a lot less sensational) if The Guardian changed its title to "... says one expert" (but it wouldn't sound as interesting then, would it?). > Eight accounts, all newly created around 21 March, bet a total of nearly $70,000 (£52,000) on there being a ceasefire. They stand to make nearly $820,000 if such a deal is reached before 31 March. Not to sound privileged but $800k doesn't sound like that much of money for someone that has access to that kind of insider knowledge, especially considering the risks. All things considered, I feel like the same people could make much bigger bets using trad-fi instruments than Polymarket so I don't understand what's so significant about Polymarket "whales". In the end people just betting on TACO.

vkou 6mo ago
> especially considering the risks. What risks? 1. This isn't insider trading of securities. 2. This administration is laughably corrupt.
onetokeoverthe 6mo ago
[dead]
ajcp 6mo ago
> $800k doesn't sound like that much of money for someone that has access to that kind of insider knowledge I think you over-estimate by a large margin how much congressional staffers and/or Pentagon employees make, many of whom could have access to this kind of information in the course of their duties.
deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]
bethekidyouwant 6mo ago
You don’t have to be an insider to know that the US wants to broker a peace deal now that they’ve gotten themselves deep in the shit. Also, how could a Washington insider know if a peace deal will actually be brokered they have to negotiate with the other party after all.

bjackman 6mo ago

What signs? This article is absolute slop (not AI, but slop). I do not have any reason to doubt that people are doing insider trading. The US admin is obviously corrupt and the Iran attacks are the most abject symptom of its corruption so far. But you can't just put out a bunch of completely isolated observations with zero analysis and say "that looks like insider trading". There is nothing at all in here that presents an argument for that claim. I am a daily Guardian reader but I stopped paying for it coz there are so many articles like this that are just complete fucking trash. Because I am the target audience (leftist Euro who can easily get riled up by topics like this) it pisses me off when I feel I'm being manipulated.

bjackman 6mo ago
Breakdown of the presented points: > Eight accounts, all newly created around 21 March, bet a total of nearly $70,000 (£52,000) on there being a ceasefire. Is that anomalous? Are these numbers large in context? > They stand to make nearly $820,000 if such a deal is reached before 31 March. Yes that is indeed how prediction markets work for unlikely events? > An account that made the same bet was created shortly before the US struck Iran on 28 February. It also placed a winning bet on those strikes, which raised similar questions around insider trading, and so far has bet on nothing else. Is that anomalous? If I was betting 5 figure sums I would also stick to my areas of expertise. That doesn't mean I'm an insider. > The new accounts all appear to have been created late last week, around the time when the US president, Donald Trump, appeared to first double down on war with Iran, then suggest in an after-markets Truth Social post that he was considering “winding down” military operations. So what??? Is anything about that anomalous? What is that supposed to tell us about the accounts? > The wallets “definitely [look like] someone with some degree of inside info”, said Ben Yorke, formerly a researcher with CoinTelegraph, now building an AI trading platform called Starchild. "Some random fucking guy said this thing", OK? > But online crypto watchers and experts suggested that the bets bore the signs of insider trading – both because they bought their positions at market price, What the fuck does that even mean? > and because some of the accounts looked like they could belong to a single investor attempting to conceal their identity by splitting their bet between multiple wallets. This is just repeating a former claim that was not backed up with any rationale. And note the very next sentence provides an alternative motive for traders to split wallets, aside from insider trading. > “Typically, when you see wallet-splitting and deliberate attempts to obfuscate identity, it’s one of two scenarios: either a very large investor trying to shield their position from market impact, or insider trading,” said Yorke. But we haven't been presented with any evidence that we're seeing either of those things?? And also I can't help repeating, why the fuck are we supposed to listen to this guy's opinion? > Polymarket’s own rating of the probability of a ceasefire before 31 March increased significantly in the past few days, from 6% on 21 March to 24% by Monday. More than $21m is currently being wagered on this outcome. Again, this is just describing the normal and intended mechanics of the market. It's not anomalous and it's not evidence of wrongdoing. Also it makes the $70k figure from the beginning look pretty small.

jmyeet 6mo ago

There are lists of the worst decisions of the Supreme Court in history (eg [1]). Dred Scott [2] often tops such lists. I believe that Trump v. United States [3] will go on such lists in the near future. Why? Because it opened the floodgates on corruption on a scale we previously haven't seen. The president has absolute immunity. The president's communications with the Attorney-General can't even be examined, basically. And there was absolutely no constitutional basis for it. The Court established a King. So the president has absolute immunity from any consequences. The president can pardon anyone in their orbit. Pardons are now being openly sold for personal profit [4]. All of this was completely foreseeable from giving someone absolute immunity. Prediction markets make this much worse because they're even more unregulated. We certainly had corruption even in Trump's first term (eg Jared Kushner's Saudi "investment" [5]). This is the new normal. [1]: https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/supreme-court/13-worst-supreme-court-decisions-of-all-time/ https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/supreme-court/13-worst-su... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_v._United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_v._United_States [4]: https://www.cato.org/blog/embarrassment-riches https://www.cato.org/blog/embarrassment-riches [5]: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68296877 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68296877

pjc50 6mo ago
Republicans spent about 40 years stacking the court with partisans in order to overturn Roe v Wade, and got the corruption as a bonus.
dylan604 6mo ago
> So the president has absolute immunity from any consequences. That's not true. Congress still has the power to impeach with the a conviction in the Senate removing the sitting president. The problem is that both chambers of Congress are lead by sycophants of the president. All SCOTUS did was put an asterisk to the notion that "no man above the law". It's a big fat asterisk to be sure, but they gave themselves a little wiggle room.

SilverElfin 6mo ago

Every single action taken under this administration has been either primarily for corrupt grifting or has been turned into that, to the benefit of the Trump family, their friends, and their donors. It’s ridiculous how open all of it is. And the people and companies benefiting from it are pretending like they’re not the bad guys.

duderific 6mo ago
In our current system, the only defenses against corruption: - Standards and norms, which obviously the current administration doesn't give a rat's ass about - Failing that, Congress has to step in and impeach and convict. This won't happen because the Republicans have completely rolled over So, here we are.
- SilverElfin 6mo ago
  If there are no paths to retroactively investigating and clawing back every last penny, this just leads to taxpayers giving up paying taxes eventually. What’s the point of a fundamentally corrupt system just for the rich and connected?

ck2 6mo ago

There's no ceasefire, Iran has no idea what he is making up as always. He's delaying until the Marines get there in a few days. And until the markets close on Friday, notice how he said 5 days on Monday. He's also bombed them the past two times in the middle of negotiations, why stop now The man is a proven constant pathological liar since the day he came down the golden escalator 10 years ago, literally every time he speaks it's a lie.

fakedang 6mo ago
Iran already knows his bluff. Abbas Aragchi even explicitly mentioned this in an interview, stating that negotiating with the US is a pointless exercise, but it tells the Iranians whether Dump is planning a major strike. So there's definitely going to be a major strike happening by Friday or Saturday. To end the war, Iran will demand a full withdrawal of US forces from all neighboring countries as well as a shut down of US bases. This will also have the added benefit of giving them full control of the strait when the US leaves, and a free hand to bombard Israel. The GCC are already fatigued from a war they had no say in, so if the Iranians strike the desal plants, they will either join the US offensive or they'll kick the American troops out.
- deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]

mandeepj 6mo ago

Ceasefire alone? Seems like there was insider knowledge even on start of war bidding.

dylan604 6mo ago

As soon as the news hit that the Iranians are claiming they have not negotiated anything while Trump is claiming the supposed negotiations are why he's not bombing Iranian power infrastructure really made wonder who Trump is trying to fool. It reminds me of Musk's tweet about securing financing to go private. Comments like this are meant to move a needle.

871ajh-121 6mo ago

Trump always announces ceasefires, negotiations and "deals" when the other party doesn't even know about it. Or, in the middle of real negotiations, he attacks. This 5 day extension is to replenish US stocks and build up the marines in the region. while Israel continues to attack all the time. The only deal that may have emerged in secret is for Iran not to hit the Dimona nuclear power plant and for Israel/US not to hit the Bushehr nuclear power plant. Of course Trump's cronies will utilize the volatility and insider knowledge. The entire presidency is there to enrich his clan.

XorNot 6mo ago
He also does everything Friday after market close. As an Australian the next dumbest thing I've ever heard of reliably happens mid Saturday as a result. The "5 day extension" is coincidentally exactly that timeframe.
netsharc 6mo ago
But surprisingly the market see this bullshit and savors it, they went up, after all.. Are they operating on hopes and prayers that Trump isn't lying "this time"? Or does everybody know it's all crap but if everyone else is buying, they don't want to miss the tide?

b112 6mo ago

This is very weird. Trump is the ultimate mercurial. At the drop of a hat, he'll change his mind on things. Predicting Trump is a ridiculous proposition, and I'm willing to be most would agree with that. Even Trump doesn't know what Trump will do next! Yet meanwhile, there are people using "insider knowledge" to make decisions? What insider knowledge!! There is none. It's all made up on a day to day basis.

broof 6mo ago

Isn’t one of the points of betting markets is to incentivize this? Now me, as someone who doesn’t have access to insider knowledge, can know that there’s a noticeably increased chance of what’s going to happen. I do think maybe there should be some sort of feature to prevent last minute bets that utilizes insider knowledge, and I do admit there are considerable negative externalities to this system but it’s not clear to me that this is for sure bad.

cj 6mo ago
> Isn’t one of the points of betting markets is to incentivize this? No. It’s an unintended side effect that risks breaking trust in the system by (the majority of) players who don’t have insider knowledge.
- phil21 6mo ago
  Eh what? It’s literally the only reason for prediction markets to exist. Otherwise they are simple gambling and pointless. The only way you get more wisdom from “the crowd” is if it teases folks who hold non-public (or at least less public) information into the market to refine the odds towards what they should be. Without insider information the entire concept is dead on arrival. Yes randos are gonna gamble because they either don’t understand the game they are playing or are simple degenerate gamblers who want something else to gamble on. Others are going to think they know better or have limited insider information that isn’t worth as much as they think, or is not as accurate as they believe. And the delusional who simply think they know better for no logical reason but have convinced themselves otherwise.
  - hatthew 6mo ago
    > Otherwise they are simple gambling maybe I'm dumb but I thought gambling is the whole point
    - olgkov 6mo ago
      It seems like two different definitions of 'point' are getting mixed. Yes, for many participants it feels like gambling. But structurally, prediction markets are closer to price discovery systems -like financial markets - where the side effect (or goal, depending on your view) is better forecasts, not just entertainment

journal 6mo ago

Trump says something the other side will say is false in one hour. So make all the money before the other side responds and markets correct? What happens when Trump makes the wrong move? Will his family be in debt for eternity?

varispeed 6mo ago

When the entire US administration is compromised by Russia, why wouldn't they want to milk it.

foxglacier 6mo ago

It's not a sign of insider trading that several people created accounts "around the time" Trump suggested winding down the war. It could have been after he publicly said that. This article is just made up crap fueling the FUD about government secrets being leaked by predictions markets.

deleted 6mo ago

[deleted]

cornstalks 6mo ago

Given the pause in hostilities announced today it certainly looks like insider knowledge: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116278232362967212 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/1162782323629...