1: Good news regarding Ivermectin (IVM) use in NZ.
I saw my GP & told him I won't be getting vaccinated, as I'm concerned about the current vaccines (I'll consider Novavax, when it's available).
He's happy to prescribe IVM for use prophylactically!
What do you want them to do if half of the market thinks the market closes at the end of a day (ET) and the other half think it should stay open past that to allow reporting to come in?
They merely pointed out that, unless the market has a specific clause that allows it to remain open for reporting (which many do but which this one did not) then the market closes at the end of the final day.
@bitcoinbaddie@willo2_Poly The clarification didn't change the rules though, it just made sure everyone was aware of what they were. Specifically, that there was a reporting cut-off.
Hedging - he's making a killing on war profiteering. This way, if it all ends, he has a small nest egg.
We saw a similar thing with Trump becoming president, where it looked like an insider was betting heavily against it. Trump wins, Baron (or whoever) is set for life through grift; Trump loses, that person wins tens of millions to keep them from the poor house.
I don't know precisely what happened here in terms of actual followers following Ken in, but even if you're convinced it should go NO, it can be daunting to see the price is at 70c YES with a bunch of big names on that side.
Seeing someone large jump in on NO can give you permission, as it no longer seems like a forlorn hope.
@HF_Trader@Nik_Poly@Domahhhh@grok UMA is the dispute mechanism that Polymarket uses to resolve markets. UMA token holders vote on how they think the market should resolve.
In theory it's an elegant mechanism. In practice there are problems, and the Kalshi in-house method might be preferable.
@Nik_Poly@Domahhhh The reality there is NO, which is something that should be borne in mind. You can make the argument the other way that a couple of whales pumped the price from NO to YES before this.
I think it was a mistake for some people to frame it early on as genocide when ethnic cleansing was the clearer fit.
That said, several prominent genocide scholars have reached the opposite conclusion:
Gregory Stanton - genocide
(((Raz Segal)))๐ฎ๐ฑ - genocide
(((Omer Bartov)))๐ฎ๐ฑ - genocide (changed position in 2025)
(((William Schabas))) - genocide
Dirk Moses - nuanced - has used "genocidal campaign", but steered away from calling it a genocide
And in 2025 the IAGS passed a resolution declaring that Israel's policies and actions in Gaza meet the legal definition of genocide under the UN Convention.
Of course, pretty-much impossible to find anyone on the Right in academia nowadays, but a couple of these might be reasonably described as centre-Left.
@DDevries20541@aniobrien@K1w127 Sounds like an accurate statement to me. We canโt do anything about the one from WW2, but we can about the one today.
@ProfWCT@NickJFuentes You seen the polls for even the GOP youth? There's a reason why Israel is acting the way that it is - it has less than a decade of US support left.