That Rose-Berman quote you embedded makes no sense to me. You can’t go up against a DraftKings trader, they just cut you off. Beyond that, the worst thing the books do is create same-game parlays with way worse odds than they should have because people are bad at multiplying out probabilities in their heads. That doesn’t work on Polymarket because someone can take the other side and arbitrage the bad odds away.
Prediction markets are strictly better than sports books, and it’s mostly just generalized Tech Bad that makes it hard for sports media people to see that.
They're all part of the same machine.. taking advantage of people who are looking to turn their $10 into $100, siphoning money from those that don't know better to those that are in the know.
The only real question to me comes down to "what role does society play in banning clearly harmful activities?", some would say it's a free country we should let people pursue their vices to their own desire, others would say that the role of laws is to protect people from themselves.
I personally could never take money from any of these companies though, yuck.
I think you’re a bit myopically focused on the experience of individual users, and on that front I agree that prediction markets are “better” than sportsbooks.
The unease others, myself included, feel regarding prediction markets has little to do with the user experience, though. I mean sure, it’s bad that we sprung up another way for people, disproportionately young men, to piss their money away. But in the “everything is gambling, gambling is everywhere” era I’m numb to that, for better or worse (it’s the latter).
What disturbs people profoundly about prediction markets is their potential to influence events much more consequential than, say, a basketball game. I’d much rather have to worry about whether Terry Rozier is dogging it than about whether Pete Hegseth has a fortune on “YES, WAR WITH IRAN” contracts.
The obvious potential for insider trading, defined here as “profiting off information that comes to you before the general public,” is not what worries me most, though it’s very bad. Prediction markets allow for influential people to bet on events *and then use their influence to make those events happen.*
So in my hypothetical example, we have Pete Hegseth putting all his whiskey money on “YES” and then pounding the table in the situation room for war regardless of what the facts and evidence say is the best course of action.
I’m nearly certain this kind of thing has already happened, albeit likely at a smaller scale for now, and would prioritize putting a stop to it over taxing Draftkings into oblivion.
That Rose-Berman quote you embedded makes no sense to me. You can’t go up against a DraftKings trader, they just cut you off. Beyond that, the worst thing the books do is create same-game parlays with way worse odds than they should have because people are bad at multiplying out probabilities in their heads. That doesn’t work on Polymarket because someone can take the other side and arbitrage the bad odds away.
Prediction markets are strictly better than sports books, and it’s mostly just generalized Tech Bad that makes it hard for sports media people to see that.
They're all part of the same machine.. taking advantage of people who are looking to turn their $10 into $100, siphoning money from those that don't know better to those that are in the know.
The only real question to me comes down to "what role does society play in banning clearly harmful activities?", some would say it's a free country we should let people pursue their vices to their own desire, others would say that the role of laws is to protect people from themselves.
I personally could never take money from any of these companies though, yuck.
I think you’re a bit myopically focused on the experience of individual users, and on that front I agree that prediction markets are “better” than sportsbooks.
The unease others, myself included, feel regarding prediction markets has little to do with the user experience, though. I mean sure, it’s bad that we sprung up another way for people, disproportionately young men, to piss their money away. But in the “everything is gambling, gambling is everywhere” era I’m numb to that, for better or worse (it’s the latter).
What disturbs people profoundly about prediction markets is their potential to influence events much more consequential than, say, a basketball game. I’d much rather have to worry about whether Terry Rozier is dogging it than about whether Pete Hegseth has a fortune on “YES, WAR WITH IRAN” contracts.
The obvious potential for insider trading, defined here as “profiting off information that comes to you before the general public,” is not what worries me most, though it’s very bad. Prediction markets allow for influential people to bet on events *and then use their influence to make those events happen.*
So in my hypothetical example, we have Pete Hegseth putting all his whiskey money on “YES” and then pounding the table in the situation room for war regardless of what the facts and evidence say is the best course of action.
I’m nearly certain this kind of thing has already happened, albeit likely at a smaller scale for now, and would prioritize putting a stop to it over taxing Draftkings into oblivion.
Though if we have time, let’s do that too.