I don't understand who is taking the other side of all these insane Polymarket bets. Is Polymarket doing it?
The prediction markets were never about predicting outcomes. If that's the level you are playing on, you're playing at the lowest possible level, and probably won't win.
The markets are now about properly modelling other peoples' manipulation of prediction. That's how Wall Street works as well. Companies can beat earnings and their stocks crash immediately after. It makes zero sense if you just model companies. It makes full sense if you stochastically model how an ensemble of humans behave under incentives and human-written bots behave under human-written policies.
"Hairdryer sometimes get pointed at the weather sensor" and "Government sometimes fudges jobs/CPI data" are more or less the same thing. Build it into your model. That's the level you need to play on to profit in these markets. It's not that different from how a chess engine works.
ML can help you optimize things after that, but locating diamonds in a soup of noise is not really where ML shines.
Is this comment satire? Bet on things being intentionally and secretly manipulated by people you will never meet? In what direction? This just sounds like a recipe for participating in the most financially dangerous questions.
The whole “prediction market” charade is increasingly proving to lend itself to abuse. I hope regulations catch up with it soon, otherwise more shenanigans will follow.
You absolutely can market make on Polymarket. The barrier to entry is actually extremely low; you can do it from an AWS instance in Dublin (the closest non-geo-restricted region to the Polymarket exchange), and don't need the kind of infra that is needed to market-make on US stocks. Retail can absolutely do it on anything crypto-based.
In order to market make, you just need to price probabilities better than everyone else. That's it.
On Wall Street on the other hand it has come down to FPGAs and free space microwave links because fiber optics' index of refraction causes a ~31% reduction in the speed of light. If you don't have millions of dollars you can't get into that game. Over-regulation cas resulted in this space being only accessible to the ultra-rich.
This vastly increases the barrier to entry for the normal person though. Is your position that just because laws don't work 100% of the time we shouldn't bother with them?
But wow what a useless way of conversing that is. They asked because it's unclear what you're implying. So could you please clarify if you think regulation would be useful? Or should be done despite being futile? Or shouldn't be done? I can only think of those three answers, is there another?
It is indeed unfortunate that the level of corruption in the current US administration likely precludes any action on it in the current term.
Isn't cryptocurrency (for the most part) very traceable? If you make it too hard and risky for most people to participate in, you'll limit the negative effects. You could probably quite effectively discourage it by sanctioning any transactions with one of these markets, you've got some opportunity because at some point the cryptocurrency needs to be converted to/from cash.
Of course, you'd have to dedicate some investigative and enforcement resources to the effort.
If to bet on a prediction market you have to both use a VPN and launder your money like you're a drug dealer, and I don't think many people would do it.
Mostly no. If you're connected it to a banking account, or other KYC platform, maybe, but the folks capable of doing that are part of the same administration supposedly doing the manipulation, so they would not investigate themselves.
Indeed, they are actually fighting against those trying to regulate it [0]
Indeed, the president's son works for Polymarket, and has invested in it [1]
0 –https://www.npr.org/2026/04/02/nx-s1-5771635/trump-cftc-kals...
1 – https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2025/08/polymarke...
> Mostly no. If you're connected it to a banking account, or other KYC platform, maybe,
But if you're (say) and American betting on it, the money almost certainly flows through one of those entities. And if you're using bitcoin the ledger is totally public, so you could track it from Coinbase (KYC) to whatever wallet the prediction market is using to accept payment (or vice versa).
> Indeed, they are actually fighting against those trying to regulate it [0]
Choosing to "do something about it" or not is a different question than can something be done at all. I was addressing the latter.
I don't have access to that. The government which has access to that is the very government making money doing this, so would not investigate itself.
If your question was purely technical, the answer is maybe, depending on the exchange flow. e.g. Maybe it was exchanged through Monero along the way or something, then the answer might be closer to "no".
KYC data is certainly confidential.
> The government which has access to that is the very government making money doing this, so would not investigate itself.
I'm not obsessed with the Trump administration, so let's not make everything about them, OK? There are other governments in the world and there will be other administrations in the US in the future. I would like to talk about prediction markets in general.
If your question was asking about a practical, realistic possibility of this being done, then your weird fixation on the trump administration aside, the answer is "no".
The existence of illegal gambling is far less a problem than the issue of legal gambling from your phone.
Turns out the US federal regulator is not doing their job, and is actively trying to prevent US states from imposing regulations.
For instance chess wagers on polymarket are super interesting because it's far more informative than a chess engine, even though engines are much stronger than any human. The nuance is that engines don't appreciate human factors like how easy/hard a position is to play. And so an engine might just say 'dead draw', whereas a strong human can say 'nah, white has very good winning chances here' - and the polymarket wagers end up reflecting that. And so there it's mostly strong players making money from people who think turning on their engine and betting based on what it says is something nobody else must have thought of.
>A temperature of 18C was seen as a 99.6pc probability before the temperature spiked later in the day.
99.6% of them didn't take the insane bet. And at least one of those 0.4% (by value? count? idk) decided to cheat.
I don't think the actual bet was insane, but the concept of betting on the weather is insane.
People still show up compulsively everyday.
Lotto (at least where I live) also shows the odds, which are always ridiculously low. Still, people play, because the human brain isn’t built to understand odds. It’s essentially worthless as a metric.