you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 8 months ago (3 children)

It was pretty clear about a day before that it was going to happen. If I'd had to bet one way or the other I would've bet on an attack.

It's not sus that people make bets that pay out. You need to compare them to the knowledge at the time and look for patterns.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    I had no idea Trumps are involved, though I'm not surprised - the chance to profit off of the suffering of others is per the norm.

    He also serves as a strategic adviser to rival prediction market Kalshi.

    This doesn't sound one bit ethical, again it tracks.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    No, that does not seem to have any relevance to bets placed on the thing. What connection do you think is there?

    What I mean is, if you can correlate bets with the activities of specific groups, then you have something. If all you have are bets, why the fuck do you assume they're insider bets?

    Here's a good way of looking at it: if you didn't know that the US attacked Iran but could analyse the bets taking place, would this group of bets make you confident that the attack would take place? Or would it be lost amidst the noise of people betting each way? Can you find other cases where big bets were placed that didn't pay off?

  • source
  • parent