Re: Augur’s Joey Krug Comments On Assassination Markets

[kahenkilonsiika at tutanota.com]

I believe "call for harm" might be seen as a way to trully enforce personal responsibility of politicians. If the bet was simply about being or not being in office, it wouldn't really mean much.

-- 
 Securely sent with Tutanota. Get your own encrypted, ad-free mailbox: 
 https://tutanota.com


Aug 3, 2018, 11:48 PM by schear.steve at gmail.com:

> I can't understand why anyone, who really wanted to use PMs to remove from power a person they object to, would call for harm (and create a lightening rod for regulation and law enforcement) when then they could just as easily wager on whether that person would, for example, still hold that position on a certain date. This would not at all imply a call for violence as the wager, and the intent, could reasonably otherwise be satisified.
>
> On Fri, Aug 3, 2018, 2:13 PM juan <> juan.g71 at gmail.com <mailto:juan.g71 at gmail.com>> > wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 13:43:18 -0700
>>  Steven Schear <>> schear.steve at gmail.com <mailto:schear.steve at gmail.com>>> > wrote:
>>  
>>  > If AP markets persist, become effective and go "mainstream" they should be
>>  > considered a RLT (Radical Leveling Technology).
>>  
>>          What remains to be seen is an ordinary gambling system turning into a true 'prediction' market. 
>>  
>>          For instance, if you listen to fake-libertarians, true-fascists you'll hear how the 'amazing' futures markets 'predict' the weather and similarly retarded stuff.
>>  
>>          A gambling system in which some people can actually *decide* what the future will be is different but it remains to be seen if the incentives will be enough to motivate those people to act AND even if they are motivated, if they will be able to accomplish whatever needs to be accomlished. Like getting rid of bezos, zukerberg, google, warret buffett, goldman sachs, and all the rest. 
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>