Show HN: Have fun betting virtual (not real) money on predictions from HN users (kudotap.com)
Building it turned out to be considerably easier and more fun than I anticipated.
Primary tools used were:
# QuickEdit as the mobile code editor (Note: the free version of the QuickEdit app is riddled with ads, it shows an advert each time you close a tab, but it unfortunately had the best UI of the 3 or so Android code editors I tested. Ended up using NetGuard to block it from retrieving & displaying ads),
# PHP for the Backend ( custom PHP microframework I've used and built on over the past few years ).
# jQuery for the frontend js (cringing) - it appears I'm simply too lazy to learn React/Vue/et al. Every once in a while, I pick one of them to learn, but I always end up returning to jQuery - or time-permitting - amateur level vanilla JS.
# Bootstrap for the CSS - Battle-tested. For a purely backend dev with minimal design skills, good ol' Bootstrap (and in a growing number of cases, Tailwind) is always a life saver.
# Whole thing is hosted on 2 VMs (1 hosting the web app, and 1 hosting Redis & MySQL).
# As to the site itself, it turned out to be pretty cool to play around with. Go there, view the predictions, bet on the predictions you believe will come true, or against the ones you think will not. You get $50,000 to bet with (not real money). No signup is required to bet, but a quick signup is required to make a prediction. Hope you guys like it, and please be ruthless in telling me of any bugs you've found.
So go on here => kudotap.com
And Have Fun!
87 comments
[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 179 ms ] threadOh wait, it's 2022 and crypto has imploded...
Edit: corrected gender, I don't know why your reply got downvoted to death, sorry OP.
P.S. OP's a "she"
> The usual touchstone, whether that which someone asserts is merely his persuasion — or at least his subjective conviction, that is, his firm belief — is betting. It often happens that someone propounds his views with such positive and uncompromising assurance that he seems to have entirely set aside all thought of possible error. A bet disconcerts him. Sometimes it turns out that he has a conviction which can be estimated at a value of one ducat, but not of ten. For he is very willing to venture one ducat, but when it is a question of ten he becomes aware, as he had not previously been, that it may very well be that he is in error. If, in a given case, we represent ourselves as staking the happiness of our whole life, the triumphant tone of our judgment is greatly abated; we become extremely diffident, and discover for the first time that our belief does not reach so far. Thus pragmatic belief always exists in some specific degree, which, according to differences in the interests at stake, may be large or may be small.
In other words, we might be "diffident" at the prospect of "staking the happiness of our whole life" but that does not mean that "our belief does not reach so far." It just means we are rationally evaluating the risk of ruin in the long run.
Can u share how long it took to build and what is your day job ?
I don't think the site'll garner much interest though. Betting virtual money doesn't really seem like a mainstream activity.
Just wanted to put it out in the wild and get critiques.
You'd be surprised: https://www.metaculus.com/
"I wanted to see how difficult it would be to build a web app using a sub-$300 android smartphone"
I guess a fun challenge of sorts.
We ended up pivoting when we realized to make this compelling at scale we'd essentially become a news site, and we didn't want to do that.
You may want a system where, the more skewed a bet is, the less money gets paid out by the majority side and more money gets paid to the minority. That way, bets like those don't really get you anything, unless you bet the unlikely case and win, then you get a well-deserved jackpot.
If you divide by ratio, and add a fixed number (e.g. 2) to the "for" and "against", there aren't really false positives, and true negatives (e.g. a reasonable bet where people just happen to all bet one side, or a biased one that doesn't get much attention) are unlikely - unless there are too many bets or people are gaming the system, that is.
This pari-mutuel system (I always knew the system but did not know the name) seems near canonical to me. And the incentives seem clear cut. It seems to me that if you feel the odds for or against any prediction are wrongly calculated, then if you submit money to push those odds towards the correct ratio, then you should, on average, expect a return.
... I maybe should actually run simulations to check that, that's just what my intuition is telling me as to how it would work.
I'm trying to understand what you are proposing and the motivations for it.
By ratio, I assume you mean the ratio of the pool for and the pool against? So if prop A has $100 and prop B has $10, then the ratio would be 110/10, or 11:1. So your procedure would be to add a fixed number to this? Either 112/12 or 13:3? or perhaps you meant Prop A $100/(110/10)+2 and Prop B $10(110/10)+2
Am I understanding this right? What do we do with these numbers?This may or may not be a problem, but I've found it requires more... infrastructure (notifications etc) for people to avoid being confused by it, and give people a chance to withdraw their bet if the odds are no longer favourable (alternatively put in stops, but that also complicates the system.)
https://news.manifold.markets/p/above-the-fold-market-mechan...
I wish I could post a link, but in their Discord they had some really interesting chats and I think they pretty much invented a novel AMM for this. They are open source, so you can take a look here: https://github.com/manifoldmarkets/manifold
I forget whereabouts in that repo the algorithm is though but have a hunt!
Happy to chat more about prediction markets/AMMs, feel free to reach out to austin@manifold.markets
For example, "James McIntyre is predicting that: There will be a global stock market crash in 2024." What constitutes a crash here? Or "Patricia Davenport is predicting that: An absolutely massive natural gas discovery will be made by a Southern African country before the end of 2023." has no clear meaning.
Most bets cannot be discretely quantified because there’s always something to argue about (such as the measurement methods). I think all it requires is for all parties to agree on an authority that makes the call.
I'd really like to wager real money. Due to gambling laws, I'd be fine if this went to charity, in a similar vein to longbets.
It's more about vision and narrative than winning money, anyway. Building esteem for sometimes contrarian viewpoints. (If you can predict where the world is moving, you can make money on that regardless.)
An internet track record would be amazing.
[0] https://www.predictit.org/support/what-is-predictit
There have been quite a few hot takes (especially about Apple) where I would have bet against that person's prediction happening. Glad it's an option now.
Please allow a wide range of Unicode characters. I am not able to sign up, because the site does not allow me to type my last name, it seems.
The letter “ø” is not an unusual special character..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%98
If you've ever seen "FNU" as an Uber driver's name, that's a consequence of the _US gov't_ enforcing rules like this; it stands for "First Name Unknown".
A good market will have a well thought out process of deciding the truth. For stuff where there is a betting market or money market, it is easy to refer to that. Otherwise for something like "Will Russia invade Ukraine", at the time the definition of "have they invaded yet" had to be figured out, especially as no one knew how far it would go.
(And sorry I might have been confusing. I am not the OP or creator of the Show HN, but I jumped in and answered how I would do it)
First decide if you want the bets to be taken by an algorithmic market maker (so anyone who wants to place a bet can place it, but they get slippage, like Uniswap) or an order book (more like you say "Ill bet $500 at 33%" an then someone else says "I'll take the other side", like Betfair)
Let's assume you use a AMM. Then the way to do it is let the market maker pick the probability, and provide the initial liquidity to the AMM at those odds. So they are incentivized to get it right. To derisk them a bit (after all they are taking bets with the least information, right at market open) you give them commission or something like that on bets placed.
These are complex decisions. Manifold.markets went though various iterations. They are erring on the side of simplicity for new users, so they fix the odds. You don't get a choice, it is 50%. Because it is an AMM you quickly revert to the right probability. Of course, since you time the creation of the market you could make those correcting bets yourself just in time.
I like the idea of the market creator providing the initial liquidity in exchange for commissions, though I am concerned that would leave the AMM short on capital to satisfy everyone's transactions. Maybe. I'd have to run some of the calculations. I hadn't thought about this approach. Thanks!
(I'm well aware you aren't the OP or anything, I just thought your comment was insightful so I took the opportunity. No regrets!)
But what happens as you start adding stuff. Toaster notification, user badges, swipe actions.
I an not a JS expert, but it seems a modern library will have these built in ?
EDIT: would be interesting to hear the original poster's opinion
Sounds like an amusing corollary to Zawinski's law. "Every program attempts to expand until it can notify you your toast is done..."
Right now the page starts with dead claims and you find pretty active and good ones while scrolling down.
I already know I’m going to like it
I predict that by 2030 none of the top 10 US car manufacturer will offer self driving in their cars (except for simple autobreaking). Even those manufacturers that offer some self driving now will stop offering it by 2030.
Or alternatively, allow self driving only on highways and such, where it's much safer?
I don't think progress is stopped that easily
As the story illustrates, there might be situations were expecteded litigation is worth it. I'm not saying this is morally right, but companies will try to maximize their profit anyway, even if there are (calculable) risks involved.
In the case of self-driving this might mean being a profitable car manufacturer vs becoming a niche, enthusiast car producer for people who still enjoy driving as a leisure.
Here is one of essay on this: https://studymoose.com/a-utilitarian-argument-in-the-ford-pi...
Disclosure: I worked for an Auto OEM but didn’t have any knowledge or communications with any folks working in the space.