#预测市场发展 Seeing how Rhythm is approaching the prediction market coverage this time, the first thought that flashed through my mind was—this is much more serious than we imagined.

Back in 2017, I saw too many people die over various "insider information." At that time, it was mainly about project teams in the crypto space running away or exchanges manipulating things behind the scenes. But prediction markets are different; they use the most transparent method—fund flow. No need for anyone to say anything, no need for leaks; when prices deviate, they are essentially shouting.

The most memorable story for me was the Coinbase earnings call. Brian Armstrong suddenly started reciting words during the conference call—Bitcoin, Ethereum, blockchain, staking, Web3. At first glance, it seemed like casual rambling, but in reality, it was fulfilling the bets on the prediction market. Over $80,000 was settled instantly. This isn’t prediction; reality was rewritten through betting.

This made me think about why futures markets were created. The story of Ray Dalio helping McDonald's hedge chicken futures is fundamentally about financial tools making the world run more stably. But when prediction markets can bet on anything—from movie endings to geopolitical conflicts—they are no longer just risk hedging tools but become secret leak mechanisms.

The key issue here is: in the past, secrets were protected by institutions, professional ethics, or news embargoes. But now? As long as someone knows and has economic incentives, they will dare to bet, and the price discovery mechanism will expose everything. This isn’t conspiracy theory; it’s an inevitable result of probability and incentives.

What Rhythm is now proposing—to treat prediction markets as "secret stress testers" rather than "opinion ballot boxes"—I agree with this idea. Tracking which addresses repeatedly bet correctly during key periods, following those with unusually heavy positions, can point to "known but undisclosed" facts.

But honestly, this also means the content industry faces an unprecedented challenge. When everything can be verified through betting, the traditional moat of journalism disappears. Who can decide in the future "what can be known" and "when it can be known"? This question is more profound than any specific prediction market event.

History has shown me that whenever the way information flows changes, there is usually a period of chaos. This time may be no different.