This has always been the case for most high-stakes gambling. The problem isn't winning big, the problem is getting the counterparty to pay. Skilled gamblers (when it comes to games with any skill component) throughout history have been adept at winning subtly and then moving on before anyone figures out they have an edge.
Indeed. I also want to give a recommendation in favour of forecast aggregation platforms like Metaculus and GJOpen. Aggregating forecasts works well even without phrasing it as gambling, because you can still have users compete to be the most accurate.
I think the other side of the argument goes that (a) the bombings would happen anyway, and (b) bombing is very expensive so nobody actually profits from the insider trading. (The bombs "only" get marginally cheaper.) Thus the only actual effect is the early warning, which is a good thing in this case.
Like if someone managed to figure out a way to make slightly cheaper bombs but with the tradeoff that the cheaper bombs gave a few hours of eary warning to the people being bombed, I think I would prefer you used those bombs.
(There are many other cases where insiders may change the outcome to align with their bet. That is bad if the outcome is bad.)
There is a fee implicit in the market spread. It's formed out of the time value of money w.r.t. the cost of NOT trading as well as the adverse selection faced by those with standing offers.
You can do this with some forms of trip insurance. I stared hard at arbitrage there a few years ago but it was too hard to get your money out if you were right.
Sure, and pay our enemies to reveal their secrets to us. That's exactly the point of these things. Dangle money in front of people who know things we want to know.
> You don’t have any enemies. Nobody cares about you. Nobody is coming to hurt you or your family
Do you think the U.S. and Israeli militaries have personal vendettas against each and every civilian we've killed in Iran? Of course we don't. We can barely count them. Just because you aren't personally on your community's adversary's radar doesn't mean they aren't a threat.
(To be clear, I don't believe Iran was a threat. But there are threats to Americans, and it's absolutley not brainwashing to ascribe a threat to a group to oneself personally instead of waiting for it to be purely selfishly relevant before acting.)
> Nobody is going to attack the US if your government stopped trying to meddle in other countries affairs
How did that work out for Ukraine? The idea that we live in a just world where everyone who has chaos rain down on them deserves it is so simply refuted even by a cursory glance at just modern history.
I hope you understand that the US is Russia in this metaphor, and you’re the guy jumping off a building hoping to break your legs so you don’t get sent to the frontlines
p.s. No, this is is not because of the account's political views; I haven't tracked them and don't know what they are. We just care about preserving this forum as a place for curious, respectful conversation, whatever one's views.
You’re significantly worse off assuming your government is adversarial than cooperative, regardless of what reality may be, and the majority of us know that. It’s why the chaos psyops aren’t working. We’re not happy with our government but apes together strong
reply