pull down to refresh
This actually seems like the right thing to do. I know it’s a game and that the game is designed to take advantage of careless players, but the platform needs to have some player protection mechanisms.
the game is designed to take advantage of careless players
That may be a purpose of traditional sportsbooks, but it really isn't the goal of prediction markets. The goal is to elicit as much information as possible by rewarding well-informed positions.
Careless predictors are a boon to more savvy ones, but not to the platform.
In this case, it’s because they made a lot of money off RBF’s massive bet.
From the discussions I've had with the Predyx developers, they introduced the bot early on because trading volume was so low that markets really weren't engaging for users. It was basically there to simulate other people.
Long-term, they don't intend for the bot to be very active.
On capping for purchase of shares, I think this is great idea. Also I remember @mega_dreamer mentioned earlier about creating a different type of structure, just like AMM, for Predyx markets. I think that will solve the problem.
AMM, for Predyx markets. I think that will solve the problem.
As I understand it, it wouldn't fully solve the problem, but it would reduce it. Dropping large positions into small markets would directly increase the liquidity which would reduce how much the price moves. Someone could still overwhelm the odds though.
Yeah, right. I think they'll come up with some good solution or will make it better. I leave it on them. I like the platform for they are genuine unlike non-users might think.
I don't think we (I, you and @grayruby) have had any of trust related issues with Predyx. Did we?
Predyx is still developing or improving, which we can see. My guess is that building such a platform with lightning network should be a challenge in itself, Bitcoiners should not criticize their endeavour harshly and inaccurately if not appreciated.
It is quite visible for those who are paying attention. It's not actually clear what the marginal costs and benefits are, just the averages. So, you can make an order that includes negative net-value shares without realizing it.
What I'm recommending is some sort of warning or automated veto for trades that are guaranteed losses: ie, once you're paying so close to 100 sats per share that your payout can only be less than what you spent.
In this case, it would have purchased however many thousands of shares got the price up towards 100 and then refunded the rest of the sats that he tried to spend.