> objective probability.
i don't believe such a concept exists. if you do, then you have greater epistemic problems that should be resolved first, before reading either the newspaper, or the prediction market.
i don't believe such a concept exists. if you do, then you have greater epistemic problems that should be resolved first, before reading either the newspaper, or the prediction market.
Without an objective anchor to measure against, concepts like "mispricing" or "alpha" become logically impossible; you cannot have a "wrong" price if you don't believe a "right" probability exists. If we accept that the market signal is just a reflection of whale liquidity and "Persian bribes" rather than a calculated proximity to reality, then the platform is merely a math-washed gambling hall. Ultimately, a prediction market that abandons the pursuit of objective truth loses its epistemic utility and its entire reason to exist.