awes
@awes
28 replies
10 recasts
47 reactions
17 replies
93 recasts
349 reactions
0 reply
5 recasts
17 reactions
46 replies
230 recasts
934 reactions
0 reply
9 recasts
11 reactions
1 reply
6 recasts
28 reactions
13 replies
63 recasts
214 reactions
1 reply
9 recasts
40 reactions
3 replies
47 recasts
159 reactions
0 reply
6 recasts
15 reactions
2 replies
7 recasts
19 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
4 reactions
0 reply
3 recasts
1 reaction
2 replies
4 recasts
23 reactions
Discourse is more constructive than throwing money around, which only the wealthy can afford, or dueling, which only a few are skilled at
Both plutocracy and violence are abhorrent in a modern, civilised society, except wealth often follows from privilege, while dueling is meritocratic
Not to mention, society is not about an egotist fantasy about who is "right" or "wrong" - it's about finding truth before it's too late. There's absolutely zero value to society if a billionaire swept up a prediction market for nuclear apocalypse, there's infinite value for all of us to come together and discuss how we can best prevent that outcome. (Same goes for positive outcomes.)
Betting markets aka prediction markets are useful for what they do - betting.
(Side-note: "personal consequence" would be partially true if betting markets had "wealth-adjusted risk", e.g. for a billionaire throwing $1M into a bet is nothing; for the average person, $1M is impossible.) 5 replies
15 recasts
82 reactions
10 replies
6 recasts
36 reactions
15 replies
9 recasts
21 reactions
18 replies
24 recasts
116 reactions
2 replies
3 recasts
25 reactions
14 replies
8 recasts
46 reactions