[zer0x4d]

The author spends the first paragraph of the article talking about how n number of users bet x on a specific outcome and they won. They fail to account for the many others who bet on a different outcome and lost.

I watched polymarket like a hawk for weeks before the attack and am incredibly familiar with the numbers. Fact is, there were no indications on Polymarket that an attack was happening that morning. The chances of an attack was like 10 percent if I remember correctly.

[zozbot234]

Right, the probability pre-attack never broke even 30%, which was basically in line with the most prominent opinions. The market consensus had been for a long time that there would be an attack by this summer or the end of the year, but probably not near-term. There will always be some bull traders who buy just before a big move in the market, that's no proof of insider trading.

[tasuki]

> that's no proof of insider trading.

It isn't. But also the whole point of prediction markets is to allow insiders to profit in return for providing valuable information.

[whycome]

I like this post on Reddit/r/MarkMyWords:

MMW: The US will strike Iran before March 2nd, 2026

https://www.reddit.com/r/MarkMyWords/comments/1rgjwpu/mmw_th...

[beacham]

Wow. What a post.

[lenerdenator]

These sorts of things are in their infancy.

Give people enough time, and they'll start figuring out more and more ways to try to predict the markets given observations of the real world. Some will fail, but some will definitely succeed.