The betting market on war is “worse than insider trading,” one lawmaker said.
  • bestonecrazy@lemmy.zipEnglish
    4·
    1 day ago

    “WE WILL ALL GO TOGETHER WHEN WE GO!” - Tom Lehrer, Satirist and Harvard Mathematician(1928-2025).

  • Lysergid@lemmy.mlEnglish
    4·
    1 day ago

    Can someone ELI5 how is it a real problem?

    Like, Bezos and other corpos will bet on Polymarket and then bribe lobby Trump to nuke Iran for profit? Is this the plot we are afraid of? If so Polymarket is not the problem here.

    Edit: to be clear, Polymarket is cancer, but I’m confused how this particular case different from any other

    • SPRUNT@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      23 hours ago

      Trump is dying to use a nuke, and the only thing he cares about is money. Tie using a nuke to the potential for financial gain in the Trump family and the potential increases drastically. Trump has his dementia, narcissism, and sociopathic behavior on full display, and has zero concern for any long-term effects of his actions. If nuking a country makes his bank account numbers go up, it’s definitely being considered.

      If the Epstein stuff continues to grow and get worse for him, a nuke is almost guaranteed.

    • ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zipEnglish
      14·
      1 day ago

      There’s a reason that betting on the death of people is illegal - it provides a way to finance a hitjob on someone indirectly. In fact, betting against their death provides the funds that would entice someone to take it into their own hands.

      This is the same thing but on a much bigger scale.

    • ToastedRavioli@midwest.socialEnglish
      4·
      1 day ago

      For one, its not gambling if there is not an element of chance. Gambling is only the case where people dont know who will win the Super Bowl, or whether or not you will draw a blackjack at the casino, etc.

      If people have direct control over the event being bet on, to the extent that it is not affected by any element of chance, then its not gambling. Its just people with control over a given situation rigging a game to take money from other people. If you went to the casino and the roulette dealer could bet on the game and control where the ball landed that wouldnt be gambling. Neither are prediction markets in most cases.

      That doesnt even get into the issues with ethics and incentivizing people in control to do terrible things (or otherwise act amorally or irrationally) just to make money in the prediction market

      • Lysergid@lemmy.mlEnglish
        1·
        1 day ago

        Is this a problem of the game i.e. being able to bet on anything (someone’s decision) or problem of someone having insider knowledge/influence on decision and allowed to play? In your casino example it’s dealer who is banned, not the roulette itself.

        For example insider trading is regulated, following Polymarket’s takedown logic we should ban all trading.

        In other words, would this bet be a problem if decision makers were banned from betting or profiting on it?

        • IronBird@lemmy.worldEnglish
          4·
          1 day ago

          for example, insider trading is regulated

          lol, sure it is. stock market is the biggest casino around, and there are a dozen different ways to extract “liquidity”

          just like the stock market, actually enforcing the rules takes a sbmhitload of overhead and with enough influence even those aspects of the casino (SEC/FINRA/Fed) got compromised or neutered in no time at all.

  • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    61·
    1 day ago

    Well now that I can’t make money on Polymarket, I have no reason to start a nuclear war anymore. The world is saved.

  • panda_abyss@lemmy.caEnglish
    16·
    1 day ago

    The betting market on war is just an auction for bombing things.

    And it sounds be treated as such.

  • Sanctus@anarchist.nexusEnglish
    7·
    1 day ago

    Yeah something tells me its still going to do immoral shit. Especially the after backlash bit. Thats a problem.