I am going to focus on the markets related to who is likely to win, as they tell the most interesting story. That story includes the lack of a quick Russian victory.
In the first half it sounds like the markets have been pitted against each other.
If Putin wins, in the sense that he gets to impose peace terms or outright occupy Ukraine, the chance of Putin remaining President of Russia seems very high. He could still die of natural causes as he does not look well, but the chances of a coup or other loss of power mostly dry up.
If Putin is removed from power, the war presumably ends without further Russian gains. So any taking of Kyiv or other progress almost always happens first, and means he survived that long.
It seems like the longer the war drags on, roughly, the more stressed Putin will be.
The World War III odds barely budged. That in and of itself is interesting. There are a few different ways to interpret this, in some combination.
Maybe the odds are being underestimated? It also might be good to figure out possible paths, and look at possible steps along the way or proxies-
The only remaining Polymarket offering I find interesting is on the no-fly zone. It seems uncomfortably high, but also markets like this trade too high.
Meatculus
Metaculus
(not Meta-calculus, interestingly enough. Now I’m wondering where the name comes from.)
I think “Metaculus” is a pun on “meta”, “calculus” and “meticulous”.
“WW3” and “28 years passing” are similarly dangerous “events” for the individual gambler. Why invest with a long-term perspective if there is a significant probability that you eventually cannot harvest… Crucially, the probability of not harvesting the reward may be a lot higher in a “force majeure” situation like WW3, even if one stays alive. But on the other hand, an early WW3 would chop off a lot of the individual existential risk associated with 28 years passing. 🤔 I think there could be major biases here, also possibly affected by “doomsday” propaganda centered on exaggerated “nuclear winter” predictions.
The possibility of outright manipulation of prediction markets should be thoroughly considered when the fates of Ukraine, NATO, Russia and Putin are at stake. If the cost of maintaining “favorable yet mutually consistent” predictions is within, say, a few hundred million dollars per year, it could be a good idea, as long as the enemy has no similar opposing operation going on...
In the first half it sounds like the markets have been pitted against each other.
It seems like the longer the war drags on, roughly, the more stressed Putin will be.
Maybe the odds are being underestimated? It also might be good to figure out possible paths, and look at possible steps along the way or proxies-
Metaculus
(not Meta-calculus, interestingly enough. Now I’m wondering where the name comes from.)
I think “Metaculus” is a pun on “meta”, “calculus” and “meticulous”.
“WW3” and “28 years passing” are similarly dangerous “events” for the individual gambler. Why invest with a long-term perspective if there is a significant probability that you eventually cannot harvest… Crucially, the probability of not harvesting the reward may be a lot higher in a “force majeure” situation like WW3, even if one stays alive. But on the other hand, an early WW3 would chop off a lot of the individual existential risk associated with 28 years passing. 🤔 I think there could be major biases here, also possibly affected by “doomsday” propaganda centered on exaggerated “nuclear winter” predictions.
The possibility of outright manipulation of prediction markets should be thoroughly considered when the fates of Ukraine, NATO, Russia and Putin are at stake. If the cost of maintaining “favorable yet mutually consistent” predictions is within, say, a few hundred million dollars per year, it could be a good idea, as long as the enemy has no similar opposing operation going on...