reply on: Zap to Zero D-3 | Crossroads \ stacker news ~mostly

28 sats \ 7 replies \ @ek OP 23 Jan \ parent \ on: Zap to Zero D-3 | Crossroads mostly_harmless

Yeah, I considered responding in a cranky way that I am not cranky but that would have been too predictable.

That was artfully done on your part.

Now you're flattering me. Or it's sarcasm. Emotional rollercoaster either way. Thanks.

477 sats \ 6 replies \ @Undisciplined 23 Jan

That was sincere: I set a trap and you dodged it.

28 sats \ 5 replies \ @ek OP 23 Jan

Now I am confused. A sincere trap?

654 sats \ 4 replies \ @Undisciplined 23 Jan

How's that prediction market coming?

531 sats \ 3 replies \ @ek OP 23 Jan

Interesting, I was just thinking about it. I guess seeing your nym always subconsciously makes me think about delphi.market.

Had some ideas around it. Might be the next thing I am going to explore more in the next weeks.

For example, I think creating individual orders is kind of bad UX and bad for liquidity.

If you're live betting on something, you don't want to create an order with a specific size every time your prediction changes. You probably just want to move a slider and orders will be automatically created and matched in the background. I had this idea while watching people boulder. Every move they make changes our internal predictions about if they're going to make it. So the market needs to be fast. Lightning fast you could say, haha

And it's bad for liquidity since with no partial matching, a lot of small orders currently can't match a big order since my model is based around a P2P vision; just two parties trading against each other (even though the market is centralized, yes).

But for now, these are all just ideas. I think prediction markets could really blow up this cycle.¹ Especially now with fedimints taking off. If they don't blow up, I am going to make them blow up, lol :)

Finding that link to me most of these 32 minutes to reply to you lol ↩

654 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined 23 Jan

I like the direction you're describing. That gets at something I've been wondering about. How do you want transactions to be managed?

I could certainly imagine wanting to have an auto buy/sell in place if the odds shift, rather than hope I happen to be paying attention when someone else tries to find a partner for their prediction.

I can also imagine not wanting that if the odds are shifting for good reason.

383 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek OP 23 Jan

How do you want transactions to be managed?

What do you mean with transactions? I can guess but I would rather not guess lol

I could certainly imagine wanting to have an auto buy/sell in place if the odds shift, rather than hope I happen to be paying attention when someone else tries to find a partner for their prediction.

So you mean like a market order? Just accepting the best price currently available for a trade?

I think that's definitely doable. In the early days, I implemented an AMM but the problem with them is that the one providing the liquidity (the market maker) is essentially the counter party to everything and thus risks losing everything in the worst case. I had some discussion with @kr around this. At some point I realized that an AMM is a) antithetical to my P2P vision and b) making it too complicated.

I only got the MVP done because it's essentially just a marketplace for parties willing to bet on events to meet. And I like that.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 23 Jan

As I try to write a follow up to clarify what I'm asking, I'm getting more confused. Perhaps I'll circle back after my brain has a chance to warm up.

Footnotes