[HN Gopher] War prediction markets are a national-security threat
___________________________________________________________________
War prediction markets are a national-security threat
Author : fortran77
Score : 146 points
Date : 2026-03-07 20:09 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theatlantic.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theatlantic.com)
| actionfromafar wrote:
| These are scraps, so far. Now, what could you do if you had
| access to both markets and the Executive? About 4 billions, it
| would seem.
| Uhhrrr wrote:
| Placing a bet based on insider national security information
| should be regarded as leaking. But the markets aren't the problem
| here.
| jimkleiber wrote:
| Well markets give a huge financial incentive for it. Before you
| had to get paid a bribe for an intelligence agent. Now you can
| just "legitimately" bet on a market. It's a LOT easier and more
| spread out, I imagine.
| spiderice wrote:
| The existence of banks gives a huge financial incentive to
| rob them. That doesn't mean we should get rid of banks. It
| means we should create a huge disincentive to rob them (which
| we do). Same thing needs to happen to people using national
| intelligence secrets in prediction markets.
| thephyber wrote:
| That requires active participation in regulation and
| enforcement.
|
| If anything, this administration is moving the other
| direction when it comes to betting markets, crypto,
| investments, etc.
|
| What you are saying is logical for _how_ enforcement
| _should_ happen, but it isn't happening that way.
| _vertigo wrote:
| You couldn't design a better system for incentivizing leaks if
| you were trying. Hell, the CEO literally said as much. Not sure
| how you can conclude the markets aren't the problem.
| abustamam wrote:
| Yeah I had to reread that part... I was like, no way the CEO
| of Polymarket publicly said on record that it incentivizes
| leaks. Had to check to make sure I wasn't on the onion.
| thephyber wrote:
| The CFTC has been defunded and dismantled. The industries
| it regulated don't even bother to put on a mask anymore.
| w4yai wrote:
| Let's make bets on "xxxx leaked yyyy info", so people will be
| incentived to discover/denounce who cheated.
| Footnote7341 wrote:
| Isnt this silly when you can calculate the chance of war in Iran
| by oil futures instead. Prediction markets are just explicit
| markers of information that is already being traded on in 100
| different ways.
| jimkleiber wrote:
| Yeah but less direct incentive than "If my friends (and I) bet
| money on X, and I do X, they (and I) make money."
| metalcrow wrote:
| Not by much, plus the volume is much lower on prediction
| markets, so people with large pockets who happen to be in
| power and are capable of doing big moves like this would make
| more money on the oil futures.
| pinkmuffinere wrote:
| I wonder if there's profit to be made by looking at the
| futures markets, figuring out the implied probability
| distribution of different events, and then buying
| prediction markets when there's a mis-match? There sure are
| many inexperienced players entering predictions markets,
| just waiting to be fleeced...
| metalcrow wrote:
| That's one of the intended uses of prediction markets!
| Although much like cryptocurrency arbitrage i assume the
| margins are small and will quickly be eaten by bigger
| fish.
| pinkmuffinere wrote:
| Huh interesting. I suppose markets with low volume would
| tend to be the most profitable opportunities in that
| case? But then maybe they're low volume because it's hard
| to say what will happen...
| breppp wrote:
| The idea is not economic hedging but gambling and corruption
| nazcan wrote:
| Yes, but they are saying that if you allow economic hedging,
| you are also allowing gambling - just a bit more indirectly.
| breppp wrote:
| maybe, but that is a by product of a real function
| (hedging). The reason prediction markets deal with news is
| so they can attract gamblers. Also compare marketing
| efforts of prediction markets and SEC control of real
| markets
| amelius wrote:
| Yeah we should ban derivatives too.
| gruez wrote:
| /s?
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| Don't think so. A lot of peoples' first reaction to
| something they don't understand is to try and make it go
| away.
| fragmede wrote:
| A lot of people reaction to understanding what
| derivatives are are also to try and make them go away.
| Thinking derivatives are legalized gambling, and being
| against gambling entirely, doesn't require a lack of
| understanding of derivatives to be against them.
| Zigurd wrote:
| I hope everyone reading this realizes that commodity futures
| are useful and easily distinguished from prediction markets,
| which are a ruse to get around restrictions on gambling.
| amelius wrote:
| The world did fine before derivatives. In fact some might
| say it did even better. And gambling only makes the wealth
| gap worse. And there is a ton of nasty incentives linked to
| it.
| pstuart wrote:
| Except this wasn't driven by Oil. It was driven by Israel.
| Dig1t wrote:
| No idea why you're being downvoted, there is a mountain of
| evidence that this is the case. We are doing this because of
| Israel.
|
| Marco Rubio said outright we went in because of Israel. Just
| watch Trump's speeches, he literally talks about the power of
| the Israel lobby and hopes he is doing a good job for them.
| Netanyahu has visited Trump 7 times in the last year, each
| visit has been leading up to this move. Trump's biggest mega
| donors are Israeli dual citizens with strong ties to their
| home country. Miriam Adelson, Sheldon Adelson, Larry Elison
| (who has conveniently taken control of the TikTok algorithm
| and banned the phrase "#freepalestine" through his connection
| with Trump) have donated hundreds of millions for this exact
| outcome. These donors have direct ties to the Israeli
| government.
|
| https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/10/13/who-is-miriam-
| adel...
|
| There is very little evidence that the strikes are being
| driven by oil, in fact oil is the perfect excuse to use as
| cover. It was the exact same thing with the Iraq war. Iraq
| and Iran were the two largest threats to Israel, we went into
| Iraq to regime change them and now we are finishing the job
| with Iran. Now there are no threats to Israel's expansion to
| the rest of the middle east. The ruling party (Likud)
| supports the Greater Israel project, which aims to expand
| Israel's borders to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iraq, and
| Lebanon.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Israel
| pstuart wrote:
| I'm assuming that it's assumed that I'm slagging on Israel
| for some irrational hate -- I'm not. I'm commenting based
| upon reports that I've seen (effectively what you're
| referred to), not on ideology or feellings.
|
| Thanks for having my back! I think of HN as a community of
| intelligent people and it's always disappointing to be
| reminded that that alone is no guarantee of healthy
| discourse.
| thephyber wrote:
| The White House has admitted that Israel had actionable
| intelligence that several of the Iranian political leadership
| were having a physical meeting together and they decided to
| attack to decapitate the government. The US decided to attack
| Iranian capabilities preemptively to reduce the inevitable
| response to US military, embassies, and allies in the region.
| mullingitover wrote:
| It's bad enough the politicians lied when they campaigned
| on no more wars in the Middle East, they don't need to
| insult our intelligence with these moronic cover stories.
|
| If they didn't want Israel dragging the US into wars they
| could've just placed a call to Iran to warn them.
| pstuart wrote:
| We live in a post truth age, unfortunately. Many citizens
| are happy to only hew to the truth that they want, versus
| the "real" truth. (note the quotes -- truth is tricky).
|
| There's a bitter irony in this issue -- toppling the
| regime in Iran would be a wonderful thing, but doing so
| via bombs is not the way. We have Afghanistan and Iraq as
| very dear lessons in how _not_ to do it.
| _menelaus wrote:
| This is the same Whitehouse blackmailed by the Israeli
| Epstein operation.
| DANmode wrote:
| You think that type of network stays within one
| administration?
|
| Political sex blackmail has _been_ a problem.
| alephnerd wrote:
| > Isnt this silly when you can calculate the chance of war in
| Iran by oil futures instead
|
| This is why I'm opposed to prediction markets - they're
| gamified futures contracts (unsurprising given the founders at
| Kalshi are ex-Citadel and why Intercontinental Exchange
| executed growth equity rounds with Polymarket). A lot of
| degenerate gamblers are basically being taken to the cleaners
| as they lack the experience to actually mitigate risk or
| understand how to strucure futures contracts.
|
| And an actual insider has much easier and much more legally
| defensible alternatives to conduct insider trading than using a
| platform that has KYC requirements.
| tlb wrote:
| Oil prices are affected by many other things too. It's valuable
| to isolate individual factors.
| geysersam wrote:
| It's a big difference. There's vastly less chance someone
| manages to expose state secrets through their bets on oil
| futures. The volume is higher, and the prediction is less
| specific.
| WalterGR wrote:
| Related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47211476 -
| "Allegations of insider trading over prediction-market bets tied
| to Iran conflict" (morningstar.com)
|
| 97 points | 5 days ago | 55 comments
|
| Also from _The Atlantic_ about prediction markets:
| https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/2026/03/central-lie-p... -
| "A Technology for a Low-Trust Society"
| behole wrote:
| Just another grift for orange man and his posse.
| https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/anonymous-polymarket...
| quakeguy wrote:
| I always wonder about when there is a cutoff about the grift, i
| mean there has to be a point when enough is enough. Who cares
| if its 4 or 5 billions in the end, thats more money one could
| reasonably spend in a lifetime. What drives this greed?
| i7l wrote:
| Power. People who want power need status, and money is the
| ultimate symbol. They can never have enough power because of
| their dark triad personalities.
| ivell wrote:
| If I understand Trump, he wants to be the richest man in the
| world. It is another matter if can achieve that. But his ego
| would definitely want that.
| mcs5280 wrote:
| It's 100% legal if you're in the inside circle
| rubyfan wrote:
| Just because it's not enforced doesn't make it legal.
| A_D_E_P_T wrote:
| Betting was once a vice overseen by the mob -- and those addicted
| to it were rightly viewed as pathetic figures, akin to serious
| alcoholics. Now betting pervades nearly every aspect of
| Anglosphere life. This transformation, which has taken place over
| the past 100 years but has really picked up steam over the last
| 15, has not been an improvement. It's net negative for society,
| and the evidence on this is very clear.
|
| Prediction markets are the worst and most insidious manifestation
| of this phenomenon. They reward insider trading and may also
| induce people to seek outcomes that are undesirable for society
| at large. (e.g. in tfa.) There's literally no way this experiment
| ends well -- which is to say that there's no way this ends in
| "markets" that benefit and enlighten the common man.
|
| I look forward to the pendulum swinging the other way. Even with
| such a broken political system, it might.
| givemeethekeys wrote:
| Yet another side effect of being automated out of a purposeful
| life.
| wutwutwat wrote:
| The purpose of life is work?
| umanwizard wrote:
| Pretty much, yeah. A lot of people don't just want to
| consume, they derive self-esteem from doing something that
| is useful for others.
| denkmoon wrote:
| Purposeful work. Like improving your community or living
| space. Decidedly not performative rituals at the widget
| making factory to make some rich guy even richer.
| WarOnPrivacy wrote:
| https://archive.fo/p1aDH
| LucasGenoud wrote:
| I think it's safe to say that beside national security risks.
| Allowing unrestricted betting on pretty much anything in the
| world is just not something we should have...
| rvz wrote:
| Third order effect on post-AGI economics when those with
| expensive mortgages lose their jobs to AGI, can no-longer
| afford them, burn through their savings and get wiped out in a
| financial market crash because most of them used their RSUs to
| get mortgages for their homes, which now does not make any
| sense today.
|
| Then gambling on prediction markets, stocks, crypto etc will be
| the new normal.
|
| This is post-AGI.
| pinkmuffinere wrote:
| > Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was not, it's safe to assume, a devoted
| Polymarket user. If he had been, the Iranian leader might still
| be alive. Hours before Khamenei's compound in Tehran was reduced
| to rubble last week, an account under the username "magamyman"
| bet about $20,000 that the supreme leader would no longer be in
| power by the end of March.
|
| I know this is more for the drama than an actual claim, but it
| made me wonder -- is this bet a remarkable occurence in the data,
| or just one trade in a sea of similar trades? _Would_ somebody
| have been able to guess it? I looked for the original market[0],
| and am surprised by two things:
|
| 1. There was lots of activity around that value when the order
| was placed, so I don't think the trade would have alerted anyone
| [1].
|
| 2. Polymarket lists the trade as happening _19 days ago_, Feb 16!
| I don't understand why polymarket says it happened feb 16, when
| all the news I've seen reports it happening just before the
| strikes. I'm guessing there's a bug in the way polymarket
| displays past trades?
|
| Note that if polymarket is displaying the history of trades
| incorrectly, my claim #1 may not hold.
|
| Edit: Magamyman's general history on polymarket is also really
| surprising. Looking at the closed positions, they just _don't_
| seem to lose[2]. Am I misreading this data? They do wager a lot
| about the middle east, but they _aren't_ exclusively wagering on
| that; they wager on plenty of other stuff too (change in PM of
| Thailand, Bitcoin prices at multiple dates, SP500 going up or
| down, winner of Wimbledon, probably others). The fact that they
| get all of these right makes me wonder if they really are just a
| great predictor. I was reading the trades ordered by profit, so
| only the successes were showing. Order by date to see Magamyman's
| failures. Thanks @stevenwaterman for catching this.
|
| [0] https://polymarket.com/event/khamenei-out-as-supreme-
| leader-...
|
| [1] https://snipboard.io/DP1MWK.jpg
|
| [2] https://polymarket.com/profile/%40Magamyman
| gruez wrote:
| >> Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was not, it's safe to assume, a
| devoted Polymarket user. If he had been, the Iranian leader
| might still be alive. Hours before Khamenei's compound in
| Tehran was reduced to rubble last week,
|
| Or you know, be in a bunker dug into the mountains somewhere,
| rather than being in your official residence? He was a 86 year
| old man faced with the prospect of living the rest of his life
| in a bunker, so there's a good chance he wanted to die a
| martyr.
| bawolff wrote:
| It wasnt just that he was in his official residence, he was
| having a high level meeting with other senior members of the
| Iranian government. It seems likely the war started early
| (normally america strikes in the middle of the night) simply
| because all the people they wanted to assainate were all in
| one spot above ground and that was too good an opportunity to
| pass up.
|
| Its really hard to imagine why anyone would do something that
| stupid when america just parked an aircraft carrier off your
| coast and looks to be spoiling for a fight.
| mkoubaa wrote:
| He unequivocally stated on many occasions that he wanted to
| die a martyr
| StevenWaterman wrote:
| [2] Is sorted by profit/loss high to low, so you're seeing the
| first page of highest gains only, which is why it looks like
| he's always right. If you sort alphabetically / by date then
| there are losses
| Analemma_ wrote:
| I said this in another thread, but if you were to ask me "what is
| the biggest 180 you've made on some political or policy question
| in the last decade", it would for sure be prediction markets. I
| used to be all-in on the idea after reading Caplan, Taleb etc.:
| make people have "skin in the game" on a grand scale and we can
| have better predictions and better policy! But what a disaster
| they've been in practice: it's just a new avenue for government
| corruption and ruining your life with gambling. And now
| apparently a nat-sec problem as well.
| Smar wrote:
| Maybe the employees are only copying their leaders.
| andai wrote:
| > The day before, 150 users bet at least $1,000 that the United
| States would strike Iran within the next 24 hours
|
| Yeah, I heard the same thing at the same time from several
| friends. And I'm not talking top brass, so it must have been
| pretty obvious at that point.
| brandall10 wrote:
| There were definite geopolitical signals of an impending
| conflict - ie. warships moving into the region, Iran increasing
| oil exports just days before the attack.
|
| I guess what might be more interesting is how many people bet
| $1000 the day before that, and the day before that. That would
| be more helpful to determine what is noise from well-informed
| outsiders vs. insiders.
| pinkmuffinere wrote:
| > There were definite geopolitical signals of an impending
| conflict - ie. warships moving into the region, Iran
| increasing oil exports just days before the attack.
|
| As a noob to this area, how would [Iran increasing oil
| exports] indicate [higher chance of impending conflict]? Is
| the idea that Iran exported more oil to raise some funds in
| expectation of the conflict? Surely if Iran expected conflict
| it would have done more than just increase oil exports?
| brandall10 wrote:
| It could signal potential disruption to the Strait of
| Hormuz.
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| And what were the odds?
|
| That is, if it's 20:1, say, then I can bet $1000 to win
| $20,000. I can do that several days in a row (if I've got
| that kind of money). If I think there's, say, a 25% chance
| that the US is going to attack, then I only have to be within
| four days.
| _3u10 wrote:
| Pretty sure war thunder forums still take the cake on that one.
| The lulz motive is far higher than the profit motive.
| jMyles wrote:
| This presumes that the nation's security is bolstered by the
| government's ability to keep secrets. It strikes me that, even if
| this is true in some ways, the opposite is true in others.
| ReptileMan wrote:
| > Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was not, it's safe to assume, a devoted
| Polymarket user. If he had been, the Iranian leader might still
| be alive. Hours before Khamenei's compound in Tehran was reduced
| to rubble last week, an account under the username "magamyman"
| bet about $20,000 that the supreme leader would no longer be in
| power by the end of March.
|
| Good thing that Polymarket gives such a good signal unlike such
| subtle clues as carrier group movements.
| _vertigo wrote:
| Rhetorical question: why do non-insiders still bet in these
| markets? Surely, after all of the focus on insiders, people will
| begin to realize that betting without insider knowledge is a
| fool's gambit..
| coliveira wrote:
| Because the way these companies make money is incentivizing the
| behavior of gambling addicts. It's just like asking why people
| will continue taking drugs if it's known to harm them.
| thephyber wrote:
| You act like they all act rationally with maximum information.
|
| Kids are growing up with the culture of sports betting, meme
| stocks, Robinhood for easy investing (even if you can't afford
| a single share of a stock), virtual items and loot boxes,
| "blind box" products, etc. the entire economy runs on taking
| advantage of people with gambling compulsions / addictions.
|
| And to answer your rhetorical-but-not-really question, not all
| people know they are "the fish" (referring to the quote from
| the movie Rounders).
| int32_64 wrote:
| Lindsey Graham candidly admitting to being the agent of a foreign
| country is a National-Security threat.
| coliveira wrote:
| He's not afraid because there are countless others in congress.
| Analemma_ wrote:
| The Foreign Agents Registration Act has a de facto Israel
| exception. If it didn't, half of Congress would be in
| violation.
| Dig1t wrote:
| You could just watch the movement of tankers and jets to the
| middle east on flight trackers. It was extremely easy to see this
| coming.
|
| Note: the owner of the Atlantic has ties to Epstein and Israel.
| They are extremely biased on anything to do with this war in
| Iran.
| unyttigfjelltol wrote:
| Folks, the President announced the attack and rough date ten days
| in advance.[1] He did the same exact thing in 2025, with strikes
| beginning on the 61st day after a 60-day deadline.[2]
|
| This particular market wasn't about the likelihood of a _strike_
| but the probability of radical _success_. It seems at least
| possible in the circumstances that the Iran Supreme leader chose
| his own fate, which was inherently predicable and also exactly
| what I seem to recall him publicly predicting, albeit without a
| strict deadline.[3]
|
| [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c86yjnw4x49o
|
| [2] https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/trump-says-
| he-g...
|
| [3] https://www.malaysianow.com/news/2026/03/01/khamenei-
| killed-...
| dastuer wrote:
| The site you cite for [3] reads:
|
| _" Khamenei, the leader of the great nation of Iran, the
| freedom seekers of the world and the Islamic nations, has
| joined the highest paradise and reached his long-cherished wish
| of martyrdom in the holy month of Ramadan," said an
| announcement aired on Iranian state television._
|
| Sounds to me like it was made up after the fact.
| abustamam wrote:
| In Islam, a Muslim who dies in war is considered a martyr,
| and it's desirable to die in the month of Ramadan. In other
| words, it's something that most Muslims want to have happen,
| but it's not like something we want to make happen. Like I
| don't want to die right now, but if I were to die, may as
| well be during Ramadan.
| unyttigfjelltol wrote:
| Yeah, I was recalling public references to Husayn ibn Ali
| (Haider) [1] preparing for battle. This individual is
| revered for both martyrdom _and_ victory, so I guess which
| one he had in mind is technically ambiguous.... It's also
| the same figure that the Iranians referenced after his
| death .[2]
|
| [1] https://nypost.com/2025/06/18/world-news/iran-supreme-
| leader...
|
| [2] https://www.news18.com/world/in-the-name-of-haidar-
| last-post...
| roenxi wrote:
| Extracting an 80 year old from their house is a bit harder
| than you might expect. Even if their stubborness is going to
| get them killed.
|
| I personally have difficulty believing Iran didn't know that
| war was inbound, everyone I talk to was anticipating it
| within a roughly 3-week window and these are people just
| working off what they read on internet news. Khamenei might
| not have known he was going to die that day and if he had his
| family would probably have been elsewhere. But it seems
| pretty reasonable to assume that he was purposefully not
| raising his security in his final days. The narrative win of
| a calm death vs the perfidious Israeli attack is powerful
| enough that he must have considered it.
|
| There is an understanding that the strike that took him out
| also took out a lot of visiting high-level leaders; that'd be
| quite strong evidence against the idea it was intentional.
| But the fog of war is thick and it doesn't seem safe to take
| that occurrence as a given yet.
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| That gives me pause, given what he's been saying about Cuba
| recently...
| thephyber wrote:
| Remember that Trump used the entire SOUTHCOM to focus on
| Venezuela for months and 2 fleets to focus on Iran for a
| month (and likely for the next 6). There will likely be lots
| of "pieces moving on the board" if we are to actively
| participate in Cuba's downfall (more than isolating them and
| cutting off their fuel imports).
| thephyber wrote:
| You are pretending like it was inevitable that negotiations
| would fail and that Trump wouldn't chicken out. Those are the
| likely alternatives in the betting market.
|
| I would argue that Trump probably wouldn't have felt confident
| enough to do this if he wasn't already running on a high after
| the Venezuela war going so well for him.
| llm_nerd wrote:
| Apologies for going in the weeds on a general concept that is
| 100% valid, but it expends a couple of paragraphs on this so I
| must-
|
| "Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was not, it's safe to assume, a devoted
| Polymarket user."
|
| We have to assume that he made the choice to be a martyr. He was
| in his own home at the same time that the entire world could see
| the enormous buildup of resources the US was placing in the area.
| Trump did exactly the same tired "will he or won't he" that he
| has done for various other actions.
|
| An attack was the most obvious event on the planet. This isn't
| some magical ret-conning, but anyone with a functioning brain
| could predicted the outcome.
|
| I think the Polymarket angle to this is more that people were
| betting on whether he would choose existence over martyrdom. He
| could have hidden in countless places and sent various tirade
| videos for years, Osama-style, but this 86 year old man just
| decided to wait for the bombs.
|
| And on Venezuela, anyone who thinks that was just a fantastically
| successful op is not rational. Clearly Trump had buy-in by either
| the Russians -- in return for some favours on Ukraine -- or
| various members in the Venezuela military (or most likely of all,
| both). Seeing several CH-47s flying over an entirely predictable
| target area utterly guarantees this.
|
| Venezuela was a coup that levered the US military to fulfil it
| cleanly. With absolutely and complete certainty.
| spiderice wrote:
| > We have to assume that he made the choice to be a martyr
|
| I don't think we have to assume that. He could have thought the
| military build up was a bluff. He could have trusted in Iran's
| defenses to allow him time to find safety. He could have
| thought his assassination attempt on Trump would pan out. There
| are a million other could-have's that we could invent, and I
| don't think "him choosing to be a martyr" is any more (or less)
| valid than the rest of them.
| llm_nerd wrote:
| >He could have thought the military build up was a bluff.
|
| Everyone knew the US was attacking. Iran clearly knew as
| well.
|
| >He could have trusted in Iran's defenses to allow him time
| to find safety
|
| Everyone knows what Tomahawks are by now. Everyone knows that
| the first sign of an attack will be things blowing up around
| you. Further both Israel and the US have _repeatedly_
| performed airstrikes throughout Iran with impunity, including
| just a few months earlier with zero resistance. No, there is
| no rational situation where Iran thought their defenses would
| give cover for an old man in his own palace.
|
| It's infinitely more valid of a supposition to assume he
| martyred himself.
|
| Weird how this offends some people. It's especially hilarious
| when we have the classic "Mossad super-masterful strokes
| figured out that old man was...in his own home"
|
| Like if the US, through masterful intelligence and a giant
| bunker buster, caught him in some underground complex, then
| sure. That isn't what happens.
| beyondCritics wrote:
| Statistical clueless amateurs found something they did not like,
| but of course were unable to convert their suspicions into
| something sound. They do not even think about it. Nevertheless a
| big sensation was anounced. I am tired of this.
| furyofantares wrote:
| To whatever extent this is true, one would also expect it to be
| manipulated by all interested state actors.
| abustamam wrote:
| For whatever it's worth, Kalshi refused to pay out on the bet
| because Khomenei died, and they refuse to allow people to profit
| off of death so they returned everyone's bets.
|
| https://xcancel.com/mansourtarek_/status/2029996077554815268
|
| While I think this policy removes one avenue of incentivizing
| death of real people (many bets involving real people can
| probably be resolved by some sort of assassination attempt), I
| honestly think the whole concept of betting on real world events
| is ludicrous to begin with, including sports. It always
| incentivizes behavior that doesn't naturally occur (the trope of
| fixing horse races comes to mind).
| xeromal wrote:
| What is xcancel?
| tossit444 wrote:
| Nitter instance for Twitter/X.
| https://github.com/zedeus/nitter
| xeromal wrote:
| Thank you! Nitter looks great.
| foodforpokemon wrote:
| Only bets on fake world events?
| arjie wrote:
| Well, certainly, if they had chosen otherwise it is unlikely
| they could have continued to operate:
|
| > _...the Commission may determine that such agreements,
| contracts, or transactions are contrary to the public interest
| if the agreements, contracts, or transactions involve--(I)
| activity that is unlawful under any Federal or State law; (II)
| terrorism; (III) assassination; (IV) war; (V) gaming; or (VI)
| other similar activity determined by the Commission, by rule or
| regulation, to be contrary to the public interest._
|
| https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2024-12125/p-93
| avaer wrote:
| This is a real thing that has been proposed, going back at least
| to 90s cypherpunk culture [1].
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_market
| zer0x4d wrote:
| The author spends the first paragraph of the article talking
| about how n number of users bet x on a specific outcome and they
| won. They fail to account for the many others who bet on a
| different outcome and lost.
|
| I watched polymarket like a hawk for weeks before the attack and
| am incredibly familiar with the numbers. Fact is, there were no
| indications on Polymarket that an attack was happening that
| morning. The chances of an attack was like 10 percent if I
| remember correctly.
| zozbot234 wrote:
| Right, the probability pre-attack never broke even 30%, which
| was basically in line with the most prominent opinions. The
| market consensus had been for a long time that there would be
| an attack by this summer or the end of the year, but probably
| not near-term. There will always be some bull traders who buy
| just before a big move in the market, that's no proof of
| insider trading.
| arjie wrote:
| Well, the natural thing to do then is to allow cryptocurrency
| bets on our opponents' actions. The men in their governments will
| likely eagerly give up valuable information in exchange for
| money: distributed espionage.
| BrenBarn wrote:
| At this point the US government is a national security threat (to
| itself).
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-03-07 23:00 UTC)