[scoofy]

>That's fundamentally wrong

If you have an argument, please share it. If you don't, please don't waste everyone's time.

[Invictus0]

if you can't tell the difference between a game of pure chance and predicting real world events then there is simply nothing to say

[scoofy]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fooled_by_Randomness

[Dylan16807]

Predicting real events is significantly random which makes it like gambling, but the ability to influence events makes it unlike gambling.

Just calling it gambling emphasizes the former problem while dismissing the latter problem.

[fsckboy]

any game with a positive expected value is also not gambling, it's mining

[scoofy]

Any system that is a zero-sum game with an effectively uncertain outcome is effectively gambling.

Investing at least positive sum in theory. Prediction markets are not.

[Dylan16807]

When you say "effectively uncertain outcome", do you include situations where the events are random but the odds are predictable?

Let me give you an example. On average, there are 14 storms big enough to be named in the 6 month long Atlantic hurricane season. If a prediction market was saying 30% odds of a storm big enough to be named every day for all 183 days, betting against that would be free money. Would you call it gambling to make the same bet on all 183 days? The day-by-day outcome is uncertain, but the overall outcome is extremely certain.

[fc417fc802]

I can tell the difference (at least I think) but I have no idea what your point is.

[Invictus0]

prediction markets are not pure gambling just as investing in stocks is not gambling.

[fc417fc802]

I don't follow. What's the definition of "pure" gambling here? Do you consider for example poker to be pure? Sports betting?

Personally I consider any monetary wager where the individual isn't personally invested in corresponding productive events to constitute gambling. By that logic poker, horse races, prediction markets, futures, and even the vast majority of day trading all constitute forms of gambling.

[Invictus0]

Betting on which card will be on top of a freshly shuffled deck is pure gambling. It is a game of pure chance.

Betting on sports is not pure chance. If I play a game of tennis against roger federer, I am sure to lose. I can predict this event with 100% certainty.

https://polymarket.com/event/btc-updown-5m-1773764400

Bitcoin up or down is another non-chance event. I can easily sway the price of bitcoin by just buying some.

Recently there was a market to predict how long the US government shutdown would last. This is not gambling--you can look at historical data of shutdown durations and form a prediction based on researching each politician's views.

Sure, an idiot might gamble by just picking an option at random, but the game itself isn't gambling because it's not a game of pure chance.

[fc417fc802]

Okay. So by that logic poker is gambling but not "pure" gambling. Fair enough.

So as previously stated I can tell the difference but still have no idea what point you were originally trying to make. Prediction markets are still a form of gambling however impure, no? Just as betting on a horse race is.

[Jensson]

Lotteries are pure gambling because you can't influence things, I guess that is what he meant. The examples you mentioned are then "impure gambling" since its inherently possible to influence the outcome without breaking the rules. It isn't illegal to bet on a hose that you gave extra good shoes and so on.