[yunohn]

> it's clear prediction markets like Polymarket incentivize sharing information

I severely dislike these euphemisms used by prediction market enthusiasts. What exactly is the value of information like “most searched person on Google in year N”? Creating 10s of options to answer this question via gambling on Polymarket/Kalshi does not help anyone except their fellow degenerates. Heck, even events like “by N date the USA invade country X” also offer no real value, except for the insider circle to front run their own invasion and profit from it. Even worse, apparently they provide anonymity and cover to illegal participants (eg obviously US citizens) just like crypto exchanges like Binance did.

I truly question the sanity of those who believe that prediction markets are providing a positive force in this world.

[bertil]

I'm very tempted to agree that those markets are not providing a positive force, given the focus on questions for which a small group of people know the answer ahead of time. They are not sharing that information because it is not in their interest, and insiders likely won’t have a great time for long.

However, there is large value for some people in knowing when a country will be invaded: if you live there, you know when to leave; if you are an airline, when to stop scheduling flights there, or, if a lot of people are in the first group, up until when to schedule many more flights to get them out. But I’m positive the invading army would prefer some kid in a basement didn’t make one Lieutenant General on the committee obscenely rich overnight.

I wished the focused on markets where many people are part of the decision, like elections. There, the wisdom of the crowds would add some value.

[yunohn]

> there is large value for some people in knowing when a country will be invaded

Are there any examples of people/companies trusting degenerate gamblers on prediction markets and making real life-changing decisions?

All the examples I’ve seen are exactly what I started in my original post - the insider circle opening a massive position on the right invasion date mere minutes/hours before they actually do it. This is useful to precisely nobody! And it happens because they are insiders, who want to avoid risk of exposure. Not to share their godly wisdom with the world for others benefit.

[casey2]

Value? The market itself values having Google insiders ("Wow I can now ask questions about Googles' internal affairs") and Google values knowledge of leaks.

Aside from those tertiary effects, perhaps people would pay Google to know this information ahead of time but previously lacked the coordination to make a deal directly.

I'm sure people with business (plans) in country X question your sanity too. Markets create value, not postitve force. Only people can do that.

[pigeons]

Question the sanity or also could question the ethics.