| Yes, I read your message. > At no point do I say the oracle target should be private Yeah, that's why I said that Case 1 (the one where you actually read TFA) was unlikely. I included it out of charity, because it was the only way I could eke out something remotely relevant to the article from your original comment. Instead, your original said stuff like: > they let people shape real-world outcomes with massive amounts of liquidity > no one can decrypt how much liquidity is on each side > where your ability to predict in advance is what gets rewarded and there is no ability to "copy trade" These things are not at issue in TFA. You are talking about completely different news stories. So now, we're in Case 2, the more likely case, where your comment has nothing to do with the news story under discussion, and you're just injecting your irrelevant fixation. In case you didn't notice, I was replying to a commenter who exposed your irrelevance: "The gamblers threatening the journalist know how much money they individually gambled on an outcome, which means they know how much they stand to lose if they cannot pressure a source to alter reporting in their favor." Did you read... his comment? My comment? TFA? |
Remotely relevant? It's not like I'm talking about cats, I'm talking about prediction markets, which is the topic of the article. You would have to be extremely uncharitable to not see a holistic discussion about other problems prediction markets face and possible solutions to those problems as relevant. These topics very seldom come up on HN so a mere mention of prediction markets can and should be a very good excuse to have many side threads on the topic that have been waiting to happen.