Pinned Tweet
If you want to start with "first principles," you have to start with "first, principles."
This is an excellent post from @CarolineMelear regarding prediction markets and their utility as data sources, especially important based on the election results.
James Wester retweeted
I was fairly confident this would be the case, based on my recent piece which discusses the predictive value of prediction markets:
Income and wealth are not the same thing, and anyone eliding the two (or ignorant of the distinction) should be nowhere near a tax policy discussion.
James Wester retweeted
Um…no. The “most consequential unfavorable result for crypto” in a specific election was when Sen Brown LOST in 2024, which teed Sen Warren up to be the Chair of Senate Banking.
It’s kind of funny, I suppose, watching Sen Brown be painted as some sort of long-time crypto hater. It’s just not true, but to some people not being an advocate (and horrors! Being an actual red-blooded Dem!) is the same thing as being a hater. I guess that’s what it looks like when you’re in an industry whose leaders decide to play partisan politics.
Side note: it’s really funny how midterms in particular compress time. 2024 feels like an age ago, but in election cycle math, it was yesterday
This quoted post is unavailable.
Tarek Mansour now on CNBC talking about this:
"One thing I will also note for future posts is the future influence of prediction-market prices in news coverage, policymaking and commercial decisions, and how that may create greater incentives to manipulate those signals."
Is there a pompous Latin phrase for, "Well, that's inconvenient?"
I have been pretty critical of Kalshi and the broader effort to dress up event wagering (i.e. "gambling") in the language of investing and capital markets. I continue to find much of that argument gross.
But Kalshi's election results, particularly its comparisons against traditional forecasting models, are pretty...compelling. I've acknowledged before that prediction markets might produce useful information, and here is some evidence that they do.
So let me state here for future gotchas: If Kalshi produces publicly useful information through the trading of event contracts, that information can have economic value beyond the transactions themselves. And if those prices help people make better decisions, there's a genuine economic contribution worth examining.
Now, back to me lecturing you degens: I still have serious objections to how these products are characterized and sold. I think much of the rhetoric around risk management and investing remains intellectually troubling if not downright dishonest. (Wagering on event contracts is not an investment thesis.)
But I have to give the underlying mechanism more credit.
Darn.
(One thing I will also note for future posts is the future influence of prediction-market prices in news coverage, policymaking and commercial decisions, and how that may create greater incentives to manipulate those signals. How much of this is just the relative newness of these markets as signals? We should probably understand their susceptibility to concentrated positions, thin liquidity and information asymmetry.)
FWIW -- this was the issue/vote I received the most mail about, and it wasn't even close. Every day I got at least one mailer from the group supporting this development.
cc: @jc_bradbury
Plano voters rejected Proposition A on Tuesday, a ballot measure that would authorize new venue-related taxes to help finance a proposed Dallas Stars arena and entertainment district at the Shops at Willow Bend. cbsnews.com/texas/news/plano…
James Wester retweeted
This is a really bad day for crypto. The industry bet incorrectly and has alienated the new democratic majority.
Things are not going back to the way they were before. Crypto isn't going to be illegal, but crypto is one of several industries that has to learn that extreme partisanship in a mostly 50/50 country is a really bad idea.
Is there a pompous Latin phrase for, "Well, that's inconvenient?"
I have been pretty critical of Kalshi and the broader effort to dress up event wagering (i.e. "gambling") in the language of investing and capital markets. I continue to find much of that argument gross.
But Kalshi's election results, particularly its comparisons against traditional forecasting models, are pretty...compelling. I've acknowledged before that prediction markets might produce useful information, and here is some evidence that they do.
So let me state here for future gotchas: If Kalshi produces publicly useful information through the trading of event contracts, that information can have economic value beyond the transactions themselves. And if those prices help people make better decisions, there's a genuine economic contribution worth examining.
Now, back to me lecturing you degens: I still have serious objections to how these products are characterized and sold. I think much of the rhetoric around risk management and investing remains intellectually troubling if not downright dishonest. (Wagering on event contracts is not an investment thesis.)
But I have to give the underlying mechanism more credit.
Darn.
(One thing I will also note for future posts is the future influence of prediction-market prices in news coverage, policymaking and commercial decisions, and how that may create greater incentives to manipulate those signals. How much of this is just the relative newness of these markets as signals? We should probably understand their susceptibility to concentrated positions, thin liquidity and information asymmetry.)
A meeting of the Bobs.
#PapaLeoneXIV #LeoneXIV
Nel pomeriggio di oggi, mercoledì 4 novembre, Papa Leone XIV ha ricevuto in udienza privata il signor Robert Allen Zimmerman, in arte Bob Dylan
Grazie ad @antoniospadaro per aver reso possibile questo incontro
This is so inside baseball and takes me back. The Google workaround via TxVia (how does stuff like that stick in my brain?) is what gave us prohibitions on back-to-back transactions and new network rules and tokenization. As Peter says: we're solving the same problems.
Everything old is new again: agent payments edition.
There's a lot of talk about agentic commerce and how it's not universally supported. Incredibly, 14 years ago, I was having the exact same conversation around a little thing called Google Wallet.
Google Wallet 1.0 allowed you to onboard any payment card, which then was front-ended by a virtual Mastercard that was used at the actual merchant point of sale. (sound familiar? cough *Stripe link* cough)
I was working at Visa at the time and helped reverse engineer what was actually going on under the hood. For reasons that still are relevant today, neither issuers nor the networks liked the front-ending of cards, and so a new concept called "Network Tokenization" was invented, which led to the creation of Apple Pay and Google Pay.
Ironically, here we are 14 years later with the exact same problem, only in a new form called “agentic commerce”. While network tokens are now widely distributed, agentic tokens are not, so we find ourselves with similar band-aids and workarounds (like Stripe Link inserting virtual cards everywhere) as we wait for adoption to catch up. It's déjà vu all over again. 🙃
100% here.
For those who missed my M2020 post on stablecoins, this is exactly what I was referring to: "There was remarkably little discussion of what happens when banks actually start adopting stablecoins in terms of risk and compliance."
Austin on why a billion dollars could leave Binance instantly: unlike TradFi, crypto has no circuit breakers
"Crypto never built itself for security outside of the tech vertical, and I think it's related to not understanding finance. You can see this with the Binance hack."
"That amount of money can move instantly across networks with no double checking anywhere. Nobody building any protocol that says if you're gonna move a billion dollars, there's a 24-hour clock on that."
"Part of why the hacks have been so bad is that you built a system that was optimized around the tech concerns without ever thinking about the financial risk concerns."
"This is a case where AI is an enemy, purely because it lets people poke holes in all these things faster."
"It also lets you patch them faster. But so far, in the classic attacker-defender ladder game, the attackers are ahead."
James Wester retweeted
Agentic tokens >> Virtual cards in agentic commerce
Great example of why virtual cards as being provided by Stripe Link and others create more customer confusion when an agentic payment fails.
James Wester retweeted
i'm currently very bullish on crypto despite my shitposts:
- the best founders trying to build versions of all our great ideas (there are half a dozen yc, accelerator and preseed companies right now for every good idea that originated in crypto)
- valley investors putting out request for startups on all our best ideas (payments, trading, issuance, settlement, money markets and every other financial services and speculative concept)
- crypto native teams are attracting talent from top tech companies and startups despite the narrative that everyone is flocking to ai, and you can see the rapid improvement in ui / ux / usability in 2026
- massive hacks in the grey zone companies, yet we haven't nuked to zero and the highly regulated companies like coinbase, circle, blackrock, fidelity, etc have remained secure
- stripe, visa, shopify, amex, mastercard, cloudflare, google, samsung and a bazillion other corporates utilizing blockchain primitives in their core businesses
- sustainable token economics and onchain businesses across numerous massive use cases
- very little overhang from clarity act failure; we simply route around political incompetence
- dealflow 5-10x better than 9-12 months ago
This is exactly why I'm still skeptical of the current enthusiasm for agentic commerce (at least at the retail level). A very good read.
H/T to @regulatorynerd for putting this in my feed with his response. (And @scottew needs to not work on Sundays so I don't miss stuff.)

























