zoink
27d ago
Investing wins long term because of overall market growth, not information disparities. Wisdom of the crowds only works in unbiased markets. The famous examples work unless you shove a bunch of lead weights up the cow's ass or put ping pong balls in the middle of the jar of jelly beans. Insider trading increases accuracy, reducing volatility on net, long term. This is good for long term growth.
Prediction markets are zero sum to begin with, so I don't expect them to survive long-term without subsidies
I'll take that bet /s Gambling is zero sum and is one of the most persistent markets that has ever existed.
zoink
27d ago
Does this sound insane to anyone else?
Using congressional insider trading as a rough proxy, the vast majority of people are vehemently against insider trading. People have a knee-jerk reaction to unfairness (caveats abound) and thus insider trading must be prevented. Being a libertarian, I'm much more comfortable with unfairness than the general public.
I believe a big issue with child rearing discourse - relationship discourse for that matter - is that people really need to define what they are talking about. Before this one sleep training blew up on my feed where the range of believed practices seemed to be from letting your 3 week old scream until they pass out to not immediately running to pick up your six month old if they made any noise whatsoever.
Complaining about 10 minutes is weird, but it's not like I spend hours playing with my 2 year old. On weekdays I probably "actively play" with him less than 30 minutes a day. We interact more then that but it's just touch points. We'll interact for a minute and then he'll go back to doing his own thing.
I understand why utilitarian arguments exist against insider trading, but deontologically I'm having trouble getting to it being unethical.
Any regulation can be rationalized. Burqas are mandated to mitigate lusting after women because lusting after women leads to all kinds of untoward things.
More options
Context Copy link