Igor

212 posts

Igor banner
Igor

Igor

@justigor

| Building @functionSPACEHQ | Researching Prediction Markets

Katılım Ocak 2023
474 Takip Edilen79 Takipçiler
Igor
Igor@justigor·
@Samaytwt startups? like multiple?
English
0
0
0
14
Samay
Samay@Samaytwt·
Unpopular opinion: 9-5 with a high salary is better than owning your own startups.
Samay tweet media
English
388
83
4.1K
357.3K
Igor
Igor@justigor·
@michael_lwy they're great hooks for our 1 second attention span, you probably need both the nice graphic and the substance underneath to beat the algorithms tyranny
English
0
0
1
10
michaellwy
michaellwy@michael_lwy·
be honest, have you actually really learned anything from reading an infographic? they make nice posters but don’t pretend it’s anything more than that.
English
4
0
4
164
Igor
Igor@justigor·
@thenarrator yeap - also why have we automatically just placed in PM's within the DeFi frame? Messari etc do this in their tools but, wen own category!
English
0
0
1
21
good
good@thenarrator·
most people default to TVL when evaluating prediction markets because that’s how DeFi has traditionally been measured but that framework doesn’t translate well here prediction markets aren’t capital storage systems, they’re information processing systems the more relevant metric is capital velocity: how often capital turns over through trades to express updated beliefs a market with low TVL but high volume means the same dollars are being reused continuously to price new information, react to news, and refine probabilities that’s a sign of active signal formation, not weakness (very often) in contrast, high TVL with low volume often indicates idle capital liquidity sitting in pools without actually contributing to price discovery that might look strong from a DeFi perspective, but it’s inefficient from a forecasting standpoint so when you see low TVL + high volume, what you’re really seeing is a system where capital is not being parked but it’s being cycled to encode information and in prediction markets, that’s ultimately the function that matters
English
14
2
38
2.7K
Jong
Jong@guyukyukgu·
This is the most complete assessment of Trepa on this app. Importantly, it has honest takes regarding some of the trade-offs the team has deliberatively taken. Read this if you want a narrated version of the Trepa docs. And if you have questions, post them below as comments, I'll answer.
Baheet@Baheet_

x.com/i/article/2050…

English
2
0
10
384
Igor retweetledi
functionSPACE
functionSPACE@functionspaceHQ·
We just launched a 2-week vibecoding competition on functionSPACE. Grand Prize: 1 full year of Claude Code Max. Here's why we're doing this, and why you should build something. 🧵
English
6
12
54
5.4K
Daniel Jeffries
Daniel Jeffries@Dan_Jeffries1·
AI will create more jobs than any other technology in history. The doomers' fundamental error isn't just the lump of labor fallacy. It's deeper than that. They assume a finite problem space. This is the fundamental error of AI and job doomers. They look at the economy and see a fixed amount of work to be done, a pie that can only be sliced thinner as machines take bigger bites. They see humans a competitive resource for a finite amount of work and a finite amount of problems to solve that must be eliminated. This is fundamentally, totally and completely wrong. The pie isn't fixed. It never was. And the reason it isn't fixed is baked into the very nature of technology itself. Technology is nothing but abstraction stacking. And abstraction stacking is infinite. Therefore the work is infinite. The hammer didn't reduce the amount of work. It moved the work up the stack. And the new work was more complex, more varied, and more interesting than the old work. Complexity breeds more complexity and more variety. Once you have houses instead of mud huts, you have a cascade of new problems that didn't exist before. Plumbing. Wiring. Insulation. Roofing materials that don't rot. Drainage systems so the foundation doesn't flood. Fire codes so your neighbor's bad wiring doesn't burn down the whole block. Each of those problems becomes a job. A plumber. An electrician. An insulator. A roofer. A civil engineer. A building inspector. None of those jobs existed when we lived in mud huts. They exist because we solved the mud hut problem. Think of all of human technological development as a stack of abstraction layers, each one built on top of the ones below it. At the bottom: raw survival. Finding food. Building shelter. Making fire. These are the base-layer problems. Each major technology wave solved a base-layer problem and in doing so created an entirely new layer of problems above it: Agriculture solved "how do we reliably eat?" — and created problems of land ownership, irrigation, crop rotation, storage, trade, taxation, and governance. Writing solved "how do we remember things across generations?" — and created problems of literacy, education, record-keeping, law, bureaucracy, and literature. The printing press solved "how do we spread knowledge at scale?" — and created problems of intellectual property, censorship, journalism, publishing, public opinion, and democratic discourse. The steam engine solved "how do we generate mechanical power without muscles?" — and created problems of factory design, worker safety, urban planning, railroad engineering, coal mining, labor relations, and environmental pollution. Electricity solved "how do we deliver energy anywhere?" — and created problems of grid design, power generation, appliance manufacturing, electrical safety codes, utility regulation, and an entire consumer electronics industry. The Internet solved "how do we connect all human knowledge?" — and created problems of cybersecurity, digital privacy, online commerce, content moderation, network infrastructure, cloud computing, social media dynamics, and an entire digital economy that employs tens of millions. Notice the pattern? Each solution didn't just solve a problem. It created an entirely new problem space that was larger, more complex, and more varied than the one it replaced. The stack grows. It never shrinks. It's turtles all the way down and all the way up.
English
236
316
1.2K
117.8K
Igor
Igor@justigor·
@Domahhhh Yes, very frustrating but maybe something we just have to go through, keep up the good fight
English
0
0
0
154
Domer❤️‍🔥
Domer❤️‍🔥@Domahhhh·
I've noticed sports bettors are a bit obsessed with classifying PMs as gambling, or at least in the same breath as casinos. It's stupid. A tweet yday on Kalshi (but applies to Poly, BF, etc.) made this point & it drove me nuts. Responding in 2nd tweet. howgamblingworks.substack.com/p/kalshis-favo…
Isaac@roundrobin42

Wrote about how prediction markets depend on user losses, and why Kalshi’s claim that their incentives are fundamentally different from casinos is a lie

English
23
5
102
53.9K
Igor
Igor@justigor·
@KyleDeWriter hmm ok I'm inspired to go have as well - is looking at market level rather than event level the best way? also why ~245k analysed but ~510k in 4h cat?? - will you share workbooks?
English
0
0
0
18
Igor
Igor@justigor·
@himgajria yessir, functionSPACE is designed ground up on this principle
English
0
0
0
121
Him
Him@himgajria·
You don’t want to bet against the crowd. You want to bet ahead of it.
English
47
28
282
13.8K
Igor retweetledi
functionSPACE
functionSPACE@functionspaceHQ·
Kalshi just shipped their first institutional block trade. A Houston environmental hedge fund bought into a contract on California's May carbon allowance auction. Jump Trading on the other side. Greenlight Commodities as broker. Six figures. Bespoke contract certified just for this trade. The structure is the story. 🧵
functionSPACE tweet media
Tarek Mansour@mansourtarek_

The historical bottleneck for institutional risk transfer is liquidity. The bottleneck for liquidity is having a price benchmark for each relevant risk (eg. WTI for oil). Kalshi has built a large community of superforecasters who are the best in the world at pricing risk. This enables us to have a price benchmark for a much broader set of questions that people and institutions face. Institutional adoption has started through ingesting these price benchmarks into traditional asset pricing model. While there is more work to be done, we're seeing a rapid expansion of data use-cases and integrations. The next phase is using price benchmarks to offload risk through block trades and RFQ. This phase is in its early innings but it's starting to take shape. It is hard to estimate the size of the market for risk transfer on non-traditional financial underlyings. The closest proxies are the re-insurance market and derivative desks at banks: - re-insurance ~700B - insurance-linked securities and parametric insurance (eg. cat bonds) ~$120-135B - bank derivatives (structured products, dealer-to-dealer, exotics, etc.) ~200-400B The current market is in the 1-1.5T range, but it's mostly illiquid and over-the-counter (OTC ie. you're trading against one counterparty). Every time a major OTC market moved to exchange-traded, the market grew because a price benchmark got established, big-ask spreads collapsed, access stops being gated by Wall Street elites, and entirely new classes of participants enter: interest rate swaps (10-15x), equity options (20-30x), energy derivatives (5-8x). The institutional use case for prediction markets could be a 10-15T market, with upside beyond that depending on how much they democratize access to products that are currently exclusive to Wall St.

English
11
2
10
779
Igor
Igor@justigor·
@0xDmitry Think it’s just too ripe for bad press but some braver platform should list it for sure
English
1
0
2
40
Konstantinos Chasiotis
Konstantinos Chasiotis@thekchasiotis·
the longer I'm on 𝕏, the more I realize: founders with small accounts are the most interesting ones. - too busy building to posture - 0 ego, they just wanna win - keep posting with 0 likes - the world isn’t rooting for them yet but I will tell me what you are building
English
156
6
299
10.3K
Igor
Igor@justigor·
@BrandonLuuMD Cool. don't need to actually sleep anymore, just convince myself I had a good sleep instead
English
0
0
7
2.6K
Brandon Luu, MD
Brandon Luu, MD@BrandonLuuMD·
Literally just having a delusional golden retriever mindset measurably changes outcomes and physiology. Sleep badly? Convince yourself you're well rested. Stressful day? Convince yourself it's fuel. Failed? Convince yourself it's useful data.
Brandon Luu, MD tweet media
English
433
3.5K
32.5K
9.9M