#预测市场交易行为 Looking at the subsequent developments of the Polymarket Maduro incident, I have to be honest—this is a pain point that must be faced in the development of prediction markets.

$400,000 in profits, a 1200% return, price movements hours before the official announcement... The issues reflected behind these data cannot be ignored: the transparency and fairness of prediction markets have been challenged. Interestingly, this precisely proves the core value of prediction markets—they present the reality of information asymmetry through market mechanisms, rather than hiding problems.

I mentioned before that the advantage of Web3's decentralization lies in transparency and traceability. In this incident, on-chain analysts can track funds through wallet analysis, and this capability itself is a revolutionary tool brought by blockchain. Without this transparency, insider trading might never be uncovered.

But this also means we need more mature mechanism design. Prediction markets, like any emerging sector, require continuous rule refinement through practice. The "2026 Financial Prediction Market Public Integrity Act" proposed by U.S. lawmakers is a traditional regulatory approach, but platforms like Kalshi are already self-regulating—this shows the industry is evolving itself.

The key is not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. The vision of prediction markets is to aggregate dispersed information and discover true prices—this has profound value for democratic decision-making and business forecasting. What we need is better governance, not abandoning this direction. This is also the charm of Web3 protocol design: seeking balance through transparency.