you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 37 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (10 children)

Ignoring how stupid this whole concept is, why is the payout based on news articles in the first place. Why would someone bet $900,000 again in the future if it's possible for someone to force a bet in their favor through threats.

It's like betting on whether Schrodinger's cat is alive or dead, but you can't open the box and the payout is based on what different journalists say about it.

“The attempt by these gamblers to pressure me to change my reporting so that they would win their bet did not and will not succeed,” Fabian said. “But I do worry that other journalists may not be as ethical if they are promised some of the winnings.”

He said that journalists are in a unique position to “exploit their knowledge for insider trading on the platform.”

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Polymarket allows you to bet on literally anything, not just sports. It's pretty crazy. You can bet how many days you think the Ukraine Russia war is on, you can bet if a certain person will make an appearance at the Oscars, you can bet when you think someone will die.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    So if you bet that someone will die before a certain date, and your winnings would be more than the cost of a hitperson, that's quite an incentive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Why do people play the stock market? Highly manipulative by the rich. Put out some bad news, pull a huge number of shares. People are desperate to make money.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    The difference is that companies are inherently useful and generate revenue. Stock prices can be volatile, but that does not matter as long as dividends are handed out.

    Betting is not useful, it's just a game.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    Companies being inherently useful does not track. They can be actively useless and still generate revenue. I guess it matters how we define use and utility here. But if we define it by their capability to generate revenue, then they are exactly as useful as gambling is.

    There’s no meaningful difference there in any real framing that corresponds to reality.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    Companies can be useless and generate revenue, a gambling company is a good example. I believe it is possible to define their utility without relying on revenue. Talking about the stock market itself however, the utility of stock is to generate revenue for the owner. That is very much like gambling when relying on stock price volatility or growth and it is unlike gambling when relying on the underlying business to generate revenue.

    The main difference being that gambling will not reliably provide returns, while stock will provide a somewhat stable revenue.

    I do see differences. Besides, gambling is very often not about making money.

  • source
  • parent