Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwaway2037 | Hacker News Reader

throwaway2037

Not to side track too much from this discussion, but I looked at that PolyMarket event: "US civil war before 2027?" Currently, it is priced at 91.3 USD cents for No. If you bet 100 USD, the payout for No will be 109.43. That is very good return -- ~9.5% for 12 months of lending (as PolyMarket required full payment at the time of trade). That is twice the (retail) risk free rate at the moment. I am actually tempted to buy a large part of the order book. Am I missing something obvious?

Also, if you enjoy troll humor, the comments section is very funny.

View on HN

> Am I missing something obvious?

Considering reports like "Polymarket refuses to pay bets that US would 'invade' Venezuela" [1] one risk is poorly written small print, meaning you might not actually be betting on the thing you think you're betting on. This could also err in your favour, of course - but it's still a source of risk.

There's also the risks involved in cryptocurrency generally - it's the wild west, rife with scams, hacks, unexpected fees, and paperwork.

And thirdly, prediction markets often lack market depth, so if you want to invest a non-trivial amount the price can move a lot. You want to gamble $2,000 to win $190? No problem. You want to gamble $200,000 maybe no-one will take your bet. Can you be bothered to go through all the KYC paperwork rigmarole for $190 ?

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46521773

    >  You want to gamble $200,000 maybe no-one will take your bet.

There is a visible order book. You can only place your order if someone takes the other side. Both sides are fully funded.

    > Can you be bothered to go through all the KYC paperwork rigmarole for $190 ?

Can you tell me more about the KYC reqs?

> Am I missing something obvious?

The low volume places a rather disappointing cap on your profits.

PolyMarket bets are becoming ever more problematic the wider it gets known, carrying the manipulation incentives from stock markets into every bettable aspect of society.

> Total garbage. Spread by a $9bn company with a 1m-follower account, a post viewed by 4.5m people. Pure disinformation for financial gain, with serious consequences for actual human lives. Shashank Joshi - @shashj - Jan 12 - https://x.com/shashj/status/2010766014829478393

> Am I missing something obvious?

To list a few: the risk of Polymarket going under, the risk of Polymarket mishandling your money, the risk of Polygon going under, the risk of Ethereum going under, the risk of USDC depegging, the risk of interests going up, and, most obvious of all, the risk of a civil war.

Several civil wars aren't known as such until long after

Examples, please.

The English Civil Wars (1642–1651).

The Spanish Civil War (1936–1939)

I'd even consider the American one a big example.

It's similar to selling options out of the money. You get compensated because nobody likes to pick up pennies in front of a steamroller.

I will when that bet is the steamroller taking out the entire country.

And the Pennies are the currency of the entire country?

Frankly, if the scenario comes to pass, currency value risk is just as likely to make it not pay out than anything else.

If there's a civil war in the US I don't see how services like this would even stay up to collect from

Not at all. Do you really think there is a risk of civil war in the United States in 2026? To me: It sounds like crazy people. I will make that be all day long!

The problem is, lets say protestors actually start getting violent across multiple state. Would that be considered a mini civil war?

If you haven't been paying attention to American politics, there are currently widespread protests due to a woman being shot by ICE last week. It looks like the current administration may be seeking violent unrest in the hopes of delaying elections.

There were large protests in the wake of a law enforcement officer killing someone in 2020 too. Notably, there was not a civil war, even though the Trump administration used the protests as cover for bad behavior then too

2020 was a single accidental case as the result of a poor system. Many people even from within the system on all levels agreed something went wrong and apologized. Today's situation is different, as the whole system is weaponized on purpose from one specific layer/group against the other layers/groups of the system. It's an internal conflict within the system itself, and a prime-example for justifying a civil war. And at the time Trump was still on the leash of his own adminstration.

> looks like the current administration may be seeking violent unrest in the hopes of delaying elections

Civil war requires two militaries. Tiananmen Square wasn’t a civil war.

I believe there are plenty of weapons around in the US in general and the police and military is also not 100% behind Trump and MAGA.

Not wrong, but don't forget there are many militias with itchy trigger fingers all over the political spectrum here, though admittedly some parties have more affiliated with them than others. It's not a stretch to assume should fighting in the streets escalate beyond ICE shenanigans that larger armies would not quickly congeal from the pocket groups and individuals.

> there are many militias with itchy trigger fingers all over the political spectrum here

That’s still not a civil war in the conventional sense. If it gets entrenched and coördinated it could be come something we’ll debate, e.g. the Troubles. But insurgency != civil war.

The devil lives in the fine print, always.

> devil lives in the fine print

Sometimes yes. Sometimes no. Civil wars are large-scale mobilizations. That’s what makes them uniquely destructive. Insurgencies are also destructive, but in a categorically-different way.

Generally, if you yourself aren't willing to pick up a gun and start fighting, chances are, the vast majority of the people aren't either.

I am, under the right circumstance. I'm not a pacificist, at least not historically. Although, we can banter all day with tough words, but the reality is that none of us can really predict how we will react to a situation until we are in it.

>I am, under the right circumstance.

Right, and so are a lot of people. My point is that we still have a long way to go before that sentiment sets in.

But if there is a civil war, what were you going to be able to do with the USD anyway?

Interesting - I found this quantitative historical study [0] showing that while a civil war does significantly increase the likelihood of inflation, only 36% of countries analyzed which had a civil war between 1975-1999 ended up in an inflationary crisis. And with the USD having such a strong foundation, I would expect the risk to be significantly lower.

[0] https://kjis.org/journal/view.html?uid=302&vmd=Full

I am speculating wildly but I would expect the exact opposite due to different actors trying to destabilize the US to the point of no recovery in such an event.

> to the point of no recovery

Interesting, are you saying that the intentional use of USD somehow makes the US more vulnerable? What failure mode are you thinking of?

Exchange it for something else before the war started?

1. ban guns

2. start civil war

3. ???

4. civil war with stone axes

There are more currently owned guns in circulation in the US than people.

One thing is for sure, any civil war in the us will not be short on guns.

Or is it the financial backers of the protests that want a civil war?

Your entire party is literally lizard people, so no argument you can make is valid.

I love comments like this. You pop out of your (presumably New Zealand) prepper bomb shelter to get enough WiFi signal to make a post. I will bet against people like you all day long and make lots of money. How much are you willing to bet that there will be civil war in the US in 2026? Let's meet on PolyMarket!

You have a very unusual opinion of me!

There are a few like this. You can bet on Jesus not coming back in the calendar year for a little pocket money.

Funny, because a bit like the yes side of the civil war scenario, if JC comes back and someone is the sort of person to bet that he will, then do they really need the payout in those circumstances; and will the gambling website be in a position to pay out?

Polymarket and other prediction markets dont take risk on the trades. Two sides are needed to make a market so you’re likely to get your payout. So all the people taking the “safe” bet lose their collateral and the winners get the proceeds if the unlikely event happens.

PolyMarket repeatedly paid out bets on Trump creating peace between Palestine and Israel even though he hasn't.

I Googled about this but could not find any reliable sources. Can you share some evidence that this is true?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com