15 ms·

Can someone explain to me how we haven’t regulated the hell out of the clearly illegal sector of betting on shit that can clearly be insider-traded with little

Can someone explain to me how we haven’t regulated the hell out of the clearly illegal sector of betting on shit that can clearly be insider-traded with little to no scrutiny? Leaders? Are you awake at the wheel?

spencerflem 6mo ago
They’re the ones doing it lol
eli_gottlieb 6mo ago
Because they're the ones doing it and they have the power? Sorta inevitable outcome of markets in everything, really.
baq 6mo ago
Who do you think places those bets
razorbeamz 6mo ago
The leaders are the ones profiting from it.
tasuki 6mo ago
I wanted to reply, but I think I just don't understand your comment at all. Are you saying the "sector of betting on shit that can clearly be insider-traded" is illegal? Does that include like gold and S&P500? The way I see it, prediction markets' main function is to connect gamblers with insiders posessing useful information. Are you concerned for the gamblers losing? But they were gonna lose anyway, one way or the other. Or are you concerned about the insiders winning? Sucks, but at least the public gets information by way of the prediction market being more accurate.
- mint5 6mo ago
  Please Explain how a last minute insider info bet helps the public in any way or fashion aside from fleecing fools of their money?
  - baq 6mo ago
    Nobody is forcing anybody to place the bets, but if you see credible money flows into eg. Middle East cease fire bets, you can decide to fill up your tank today, or not. We can’t think for you here, if you don’t see anything useful in the price then it’s time to educate yourself until you do. You should consider these bets more trustworthy than any news you read in mainstream media. There might even be a way to fund journalism here, though ethics are quite muddy indeed.
    - GuestFAUniverse 6mo ago
      And what makes you believe that those (basically) peanuts that get bet are the real indicators? The insiders might as well run a backroom prediction market and just manipulate the public market. And even with bigger sums: you never know if it isn't just a variant of the shell game. There are no real signals.
      - baq 6mo ago
        It's a fallacy to think all insiders are big players. Small fish want a piece, too, and are not constrained in the same ways the big ones are.
- mullingitover 6mo ago
  > Are you concerned for the gamblers losing? I’m concerned about people with addictions being exploited by greedy degenerates who don’t care about the negative externalities with which they’re burdening our society, yes.
  - tasuki 6mo ago
    Do you propose to make all addictive endeavours illegal? Ban porn? It might actually be a good idea in theory, but I doubt it'd work in practice, who knows.
    - UncleMeat 6mo ago
      Sports gambling was illegal in most states just a few years ago. Prediction markets also didn't exist. We have ample evidence to show us that it did work fine to ban these things. We aren't talking about some hypothetical world. We are talking about a world that existed just ten years ago. This isn't a "who knows" situation.
    - mullingitover 6mo ago
      I'm not doing whataboutisms today, sorry. Gambling is particular, specific burden and crime against society that's been recognized as such for thousands of years. The recent experiments with legalizing it on an industrial scale are simply experiments with legalizing crime. We don't have to touch the stove but I guess simply being told about what happens isn't enough for us.
fontain 6mo ago
I mean... insiders are betting on war crimes. Yes, the insider betting is bad but it doesn't even touch the edges compared to committing war crimes. And if the government is committing war crimes, why would they care about something so inconsequential as betting on them?
ed_elliott_asc 6mo ago
Does it need to be regulated? This isn’t pension funds placing bets risking people’s investment money. People using Polymarket are gambling on pretty random things and must understand the risk , whether it is on major geopolitical events or someone counting cars going through a junction these events can all be manipulated pretty easily. People want to gamble on random things? Let them. If anything is regulate the other side, people in government can’t use sites like polymarket because I don’t want them making stupid decisions so bets fall one side or another.
- chii 6mo ago
  I think making the bets not anonymous is sufficient imho. If a gov't official (including the president) is leaking classified information, there's already laws about that isnt there? (Whether it's effective is another question - i'm assuming it's currently effective).
  - ed_elliott_asc 6mo ago
    I think that we are agreeing here, there should be regulation on the government side and laws without regulating what people can bet on.
- halapro 6mo ago
  It's not so simple. The game must be fair. What if 100% of the bets you place in a slot machine go to the owner? It's the exact same thing here. Slot machines are regulated so the game is fair and they're not simply machines where the rich steal from the poor. Such a machine would be scam by definition.
  - ed_elliott_asc 6mo ago
    I'm not a polymarket gambler or a gambler at all really, so I have no skin in this game but why does it have to be fair? I would say casinos and slot machines are already stealing from the poor and giving to the rich and already a scam, people play them (aside from addicts) because there is a chance they will win, they know not everyone wins. I'm in favour of people being treated fairly I just think regulation isn't what is required here, more education "play this but the odds are tilted away from you".
UncleMeat 6mo ago
It's even worse. A federal court just ruled that these markets cannot be meaningfully regulated by states because they are selling financial instruments rather than providing a gambling platform and federal law preempts state regulation on these financial instruments.
sfifs 6mo ago
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Jordan-117 6mo ago
Might have something to do with electing a deeply corrupt conman as head of the executive branch and giving his congressional sycophants a majority.

spencerflem 6mo ago

They’re the ones doing it lol

eli_gottlieb 6mo ago

Because they're the ones doing it and they have the power? Sorta inevitable outcome of markets in everything, really.

baq 6mo ago

Who do you think places those bets

razorbeamz 6mo ago

The leaders are the ones profiting from it.

tasuki 6mo ago

I wanted to reply, but I think I just don't understand your comment at all. Are you saying the "sector of betting on shit that can clearly be insider-traded" is illegal? Does that include like gold and S&P500? The way I see it, prediction markets' main function is to connect gamblers with insiders posessing useful information. Are you concerned for the gamblers losing? But they were gonna lose anyway, one way or the other. Or are you concerned about the insiders winning? Sucks, but at least the public gets information by way of the prediction market being more accurate.

mint5 6mo ago
Please Explain how a last minute insider info bet helps the public in any way or fashion aside from fleecing fools of their money?
- baq 6mo ago
  Nobody is forcing anybody to place the bets, but if you see credible money flows into eg. Middle East cease fire bets, you can decide to fill up your tank today, or not. We can’t think for you here, if you don’t see anything useful in the price then it’s time to educate yourself until you do. You should consider these bets more trustworthy than any news you read in mainstream media. There might even be a way to fund journalism here, though ethics are quite muddy indeed.
  - GuestFAUniverse 6mo ago
    And what makes you believe that those (basically) peanuts that get bet are the real indicators? The insiders might as well run a backroom prediction market and just manipulate the public market. And even with bigger sums: you never know if it isn't just a variant of the shell game. There are no real signals.
    - baq 6mo ago
      It's a fallacy to think all insiders are big players. Small fish want a piece, too, and are not constrained in the same ways the big ones are.
mullingitover 6mo ago
> Are you concerned for the gamblers losing? I’m concerned about people with addictions being exploited by greedy degenerates who don’t care about the negative externalities with which they’re burdening our society, yes.
- tasuki 6mo ago
  Do you propose to make all addictive endeavours illegal? Ban porn? It might actually be a good idea in theory, but I doubt it'd work in practice, who knows.
  - UncleMeat 6mo ago
    Sports gambling was illegal in most states just a few years ago. Prediction markets also didn't exist. We have ample evidence to show us that it did work fine to ban these things. We aren't talking about some hypothetical world. We are talking about a world that existed just ten years ago. This isn't a "who knows" situation.
  - mullingitover 6mo ago
    I'm not doing whataboutisms today, sorry. Gambling is particular, specific burden and crime against society that's been recognized as such for thousands of years. The recent experiments with legalizing it on an industrial scale are simply experiments with legalizing crime. We don't have to touch the stove but I guess simply being told about what happens isn't enough for us.

fontain 6mo ago

I mean... insiders are betting on war crimes. Yes, the insider betting is bad but it doesn't even touch the edges compared to committing war crimes. And if the government is committing war crimes, why would they care about something so inconsequential as betting on them?

ed_elliott_asc 6mo ago

Does it need to be regulated? This isn’t pension funds placing bets risking people’s investment money. People using Polymarket are gambling on pretty random things and must understand the risk , whether it is on major geopolitical events or someone counting cars going through a junction these events can all be manipulated pretty easily. People want to gamble on random things? Let them. If anything is regulate the other side, people in government can’t use sites like polymarket because I don’t want them making stupid decisions so bets fall one side or another.

chii 6mo ago
I think making the bets not anonymous is sufficient imho. If a gov't official (including the president) is leaking classified information, there's already laws about that isnt there? (Whether it's effective is another question - i'm assuming it's currently effective).
- ed_elliott_asc 6mo ago
  I think that we are agreeing here, there should be regulation on the government side and laws without regulating what people can bet on.
halapro 6mo ago
It's not so simple. The game must be fair. What if 100% of the bets you place in a slot machine go to the owner? It's the exact same thing here. Slot machines are regulated so the game is fair and they're not simply machines where the rich steal from the poor. Such a machine would be scam by definition.
- ed_elliott_asc 6mo ago
  I'm not a polymarket gambler or a gambler at all really, so I have no skin in this game but why does it have to be fair? I would say casinos and slot machines are already stealing from the poor and giving to the rich and already a scam, people play them (aside from addicts) because there is a chance they will win, they know not everyone wins. I'm in favour of people being treated fairly I just think regulation isn't what is required here, more education "play this but the odds are tilted away from you".

UncleMeat 6mo ago

It's even worse. A federal court just ruled that these markets cannot be meaningfully regulated by states because they are selling financial instruments rather than providing a gambling platform and federal law preempts state regulation on these financial instruments.

sfifs 6mo ago

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Jordan-117 6mo ago

Might have something to do with electing a deeply corrupt conman as head of the executive branch and giving his congressional sycophants a majority.