Salta al contenuto principale


One strange thing to me with all this rampant insider trading on Polymarket etc is why the gamblers themselves aren't loudly calling foul. These insiders are jumping in at the last second and diluting their winnings!

If I had $10 the coin flip was heads, you had $10 that the coin was tails, the coin is in the air, and someone bets at the last second $90 that the coin is heads (because they're friends with the magician pulling the trick), and turns out, the coin is heads!

Now I WOULD have won $10 on my $10 bet. But now I'm only walking away with $1. That sort of shit would make me take my business somewhere else.

Edit maybe I'm misunderstanding how their math works out? But either way, someone's losing earnings when insiders play

infosec.exchange/@JessTheUnsti…


@dlakelan okay it seems like you're more right than me? But I can't imagine that there's a ton of counterparties showing up at the last minute. So I'm guessing they're basically buying shares off of the people who have order limits? So for the people who said "sell at 0.7", their shares get bought at the 0.7 of the value rather than 100% of the value
alphatechfinance.com/tech/poly…

Questa voce è stata modificata (2 giorni fa)

Oblomov reshared this.

in reply to Jess👾

Along with the other excellent points in your replies, I suspect that there's also the fact that people who are good at math and critical thinking aren't usually found gambling on proposition bets. 🤪
in reply to Jess👾

@jannem calling foul is a sure way to mark oneself as outside the in-group that is running the grift, working directly against it

and if there is something many of the gamblers very badly want, it is to be part of that in-group

in reply to SnoopJ

@SnoopJ @jannem Even if I decide not to call foul, me as a somewhat rational spender of money would want to seek out a more fair casino
in reply to Jess👾

@SnoopJ @jannem like - cheating at dice or cards or whatever has been the cause of a billion fights
in reply to Jess👾

Americans imagine that they are "temporarily embarrassed billionaires", and similarly every gambler on this thing imagines that one day they will somehow get some great insider trading tidbit
in reply to Jess👾

I'm not an expert, but I don't think that's how these markets work?

I thought for example suppose there's some event like "US Bombs Iran in Feb" it's Jan, the current price is $0.1 per contract, each contract pays $1.

Now you think "there's a much higher chance than 10%, I'll buy $1000 worth". And someone else says "there's no chance... I'll take $0.1 for every $1 I have to put up no problem".

in reply to Daniel Lakeland

So then the counterparty puts $1000 in their account and sells you 1000 contracts for $100. And hopes to hold them through the end of Feb, and collect the $100.

You hope iran gets bombed and you collect the $1000 held in escrow.

It doesn't matter what else happens in the market... at the time you buy you've locked in your return.

Now, that's how things worked last I looked, maybe a decade ago... have they changed?

in reply to Daniel Lakeland

@dlakelan okay it seems like you're more right than me? But I can't imagine that there's a ton of counterparties showing up at the last minute. So I'm guessing they're basically buying shares off of the people who have order limits? So for the people who said "sell at 0.7", their shares get bought at the 0.7 of the value rather than 100% of the value
alphatechfinance.com/tech/poly…

Oblomov reshared this.

in reply to Jess👾

Yeah, placing a limit order definitely exposes you to insider risk. Im kinda surprised these markets have such depth, that you could buy/sell hundreds of millions of dollars worth in the 10 mins before you push the go button or whatever.