Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Nick Tomainoš©
@nick
Understand this sentiment, gambling can be very bad when taken to the extreme. But when people with knowledge contribute by risking money in a market, more truth is revealed. This is great for humanity. The much darker alternative is a world where a few companies control perception with no accountability.
6 replies
2 recasts
27 reactions
Httpz
@httpz
Perhaps in that same vein it could also help spread misinformation in the face of mass adoption? If PMs are indeed the ākiller appā, and if early on the zeitgeist is that ābets in prediction markets are more likely to be trueā People/groups with more money than morals could fund helpful untruths
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
JB Rubinovitz āāØ-āØ
@rubinovitz
I think weāll look back in shock about how weād make major life decisions based on bad authoritative sources and journalism before prediction markets. Agree gambling addiction is bad, but prediction markets may be net positive for society. Just based on how dangerously hard it is to find truth now.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
jihad ā
@jihad
Conceptually, itās a very interesting idea. I agree with the goal. I just wonder if we can reach the same or similar outcome without primitive, zero-sum markets that will inevitably lead to adverse behavior.
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Timbrrr š©š§¢ ā š
@twb
Itās like community notes but with money
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
CJ
@cjh
not to mention when autonomous agent swarms start doing it microscopically, at scale. their survival will depend on the efficient determination of truth
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
kia
@kia.eth
speculation =/= gambling casually equating the two is Keynesian talk if not outright Marxist. you'll find yourself losing the fight to 'gut feelings' if you don't respect Rectification of Names. this is how they're different: https://paragraph.xyz/@kia/speculation
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
~disrec-sicsel
@rhysmonkey
$rep to the moon
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
