France's main gambling sector regulator said on Friday it had instructed the country's internet service providers to block access to the Polymarket website, one of a number of online prediction…
I think the distinction is important. Gambling is random outcome. Prédiction means you could influence the outcome. Think of a terrorist betting on the timing of the next attack
It’s also gambling. But the potential for corruption is just on a whole other level; “gambling” is a euphemism for prediction markets.
I think it’s silly you’re getting downvoted over semantics; gambling has influenced outcomes, yes, technically, but it’s generally a self-contained game.
It is and it isn’t. The hand you get dealt is random (assuming no funny business) but the people who do consistently well are playing their opponents more than their cards.
If you’re influencing the outcome via some private mechanism that’s a crime and is in fact illegal (a little thing known as insider trading or cheating depending on how you go about it). So per your definition either you can’t influence the outcome in which case it’s gambling, or you can in which case it’s illegal and you’re committing a crime.
All that said I think the definition of gambling being truly random isn’t quite right. Gambling has always been about statistical outcomes because if it was truly random nobody would ever make any money off of it so nobody would waste their time. Remember the house always wins because they control the odds. These sites are just bookies in techbro clothing using marketing and legal loopholes to run illegal gambling sites.
Insider trading applies to securities. Polymarket bets are not securities.
Manipulation violates Polymarket’s ToS, but that’s not criminal.
Now, it might meet the legal criteria for fraud, depending on what one does. But that’s a “maybe.” I’d say that is far easier to get away with than insider trading. EDIT: Especially when hopping jurisdictions (which is not so easy with securities).
Scenarios in gambling are rarely “purely random”. I.e. the likelyhood of winning in poker depends on what you already got dealt and what other cards got dealt and so on. What does “purely random” even mean? Like a lottery with equal chance of winning for all participants? Yea that’s gambling but just one kind of gambling.
But that is what the whole discussion is about. Many scenarios aren’t just gambling because they have a degree of predictability to it: poker, stock market, betting on the day when the US starts WW3.
Probably only quantum processes are truly random, but for this argument, processes are practically random if the governing variables are not human-knowable. A dice throw, roulette, lottery numbers drawn from a bowl. They are deep down deterministic, but not predictable to any degree.
Most forms of casino gambling except card games are purely random: dice, roulette, slot machines. I agree with you that there being an element of skill or knowledge doesnt stop it being gambling however.
I hate how they’re supporting the fiction that this isn’t gambling by calling it a “prediction site”. It’s gambling, always has been.
This isn’t much different than google calling installing software “side loading”. All just lawyer speech to be able to bend and break the rules
JAILBREAKING SCUM
Literally just having access to your device you paid for…
Jaywalking scum!
Literally crossing the street as humans have done since the street was invented, ruined by cars taking over in the 1900s
I think the distinction is important. Gambling is random outcome. Prédiction means you could influence the outcome. Think of a terrorist betting on the timing of the next attack
Actually, yeah.
It’s also gambling. But the potential for corruption is just on a whole other level; “gambling” is a euphemism for prediction markets.
I think it’s silly you’re getting downvoted over semantics; gambling has influenced outcomes, yes, technically, but it’s generally a self-contained game.
So poker isn’t gambling? Ok.
It is and it isn’t. The hand you get dealt is random (assuming no funny business) but the people who do consistently well are playing their opponents more than their cards.
If you’re influencing the outcome via some private mechanism that’s a crime and is in fact illegal (a little thing known as insider trading or cheating depending on how you go about it). So per your definition either you can’t influence the outcome in which case it’s gambling, or you can in which case it’s illegal and you’re committing a crime.
All that said I think the definition of gambling being truly random isn’t quite right. Gambling has always been about statistical outcomes because if it was truly random nobody would ever make any money off of it so nobody would waste their time. Remember the house always wins because they control the odds. These sites are just bookies in techbro clothing using marketing and legal loopholes to run illegal gambling sites.
Insider trading applies to securities. Polymarket bets are not securities.
Manipulation violates Polymarket’s ToS, but that’s not criminal.
Now, it might meet the legal criteria for fraud, depending on what one does. But that’s a “maybe.” I’d say that is far easier to get away with than insider trading. EDIT: Especially when hopping jurisdictions (which is not so easy with securities).
I mean, it is both?
By that logic, all gambling is just prediction
how did you come to this conclusion? betting on scenarios that are purely random are just gambling.
Scenarios in gambling are rarely “purely random”. I.e. the likelyhood of winning in poker depends on what you already got dealt and what other cards got dealt and so on. What does “purely random” even mean? Like a lottery with equal chance of winning for all participants? Yea that’s gambling but just one kind of gambling.
But that is what the whole discussion is about. Many scenarios aren’t just gambling because they have a degree of predictability to it: poker, stock market, betting on the day when the US starts WW3.
Probably only quantum processes are truly random, but for this argument, processes are practically random if the governing variables are not human-knowable. A dice throw, roulette, lottery numbers drawn from a bowl. They are deep down deterministic, but not predictable to any degree.
Most forms of casino gambling except card games are purely random: dice, roulette, slot machines. I agree with you that there being an element of skill or knowledge doesnt stop it being gambling however.
Only gambling on thermal noise is the real deal /½s
It isn’t gambling because the result is determined by the actions of its users. This is called spot-fixing.