Will Ethereum merge to Proof-of-Stake by July?
Resolved
NO
This resolves according to https://polymarket.com/market/will-the-ethereum-merge-eip-3675-occur-by-july-1-2022 . Quoting them: This is a market on if The Merge will occur on the Ethereum mainnet as described in EIP-3675 (or any successor to EIP-3675) by the resolution time, July 1 2022, 11:59:59 PM ET, transitioning the Ethereum blockchain to proof-of-stake. If the first proof-of-stake block (defined in EIP-3675 as TRANSITION_BLOCK) is produced before the resolution time, this market will resolve to "Yes". Otherwise, the market will resolve "No". Note, that forks to the execution layer and the consensus layer implementing EIP-3675 will not have any impact on the market resolution. Only the actual occurrence of The Merge will be considered.

🏅 Top traders

#NameTotal profit
1
Unknown user avatar
PeterBorah
Ṁ90
2
Unknown user avatar
Tim
Ṁ64
3
Unknown user avatar
Tetraspace
Ṁ51
4
Unknown user avatar
Gurkenglas
Ṁ49
5
Unknown user avatar
kalassak
Ṁ44

💬 Proven correct

Q avatar
Q
bought Ṁ100 of NO
Proof of stake's acronym of POS is appropriate. There are a lot of issues with it as a consensus mechanism that the Beacon chain simply doesn't have solid answers to yet. I expect Vitalik & Co understand this and are pulling a bit of a Star Citizen with a perpetual $CURRENT_DATE + 6 months timeline.

💸 Best bet

A trader bought Ṁ100 NO from 97% to 87%
Vivek Hebbar made Ṁ246!
Sort by:
PeterBerggren avatar
Peter Berggren
sold Ṁ109 of NO
Estimated odds here is below Polymarket's, so I'm closing out my position.
PeterBerggren avatar
Peter Berggren
bought Ṁ100 of NO
Current value for July on Polymarket is well below ours. I trust them on this one, since they have more liquidity than we do.
BoltonBailey avatar
Bolton Bailey
sold Ṁ26 of NO
I still feel 25%-30% is appropriate, and since the probability has dropped below this, I am selling most of my NO shares
PeterBerggren avatar
Peter Berggren
sold Ṁ53 of NO
It's gotten close enough to the Polymarket result now that those few percentage points are worth less to me than the random noise of either market going in the wrong direction could be.
BoltonBailey avatar
Bolton Bailey
bought Ṁ11 of NO
I'm already pretty heavily invested in this, but the price keeps going up so I'll keep shorting. In the recent all core devs call, they talked about how there were a few clients still not working correctly.
PeterBerggren avatar
Peter Berggren
bought Ṁ50 of NO
Someone else seems to have brought the odds here above Polymarket's. I'm keeping the same principle I previously did, and assuming real-money markets work better on this. Intend to sell once the probability goes down to 30%.
BoltonBailey avatar
Bolton Bailey
bought Ṁ26 of NO
Most recent testnet kiln has gone through the merge, and there is a client that seems to not be working properly. https://twitter.com/TimBeiko/status/1503756418788298756?s=20&t=CppHPozpfniDcTefQOaSGw
PeterBerggren avatar
Peter Berggren
bought Ṁ25 of YES
I'm still bullish here. The price here has gone down, while Polymarket's price has not gone down at all. Not all Polymarket users are necessarily bullish on crypto, and their market design doesn't necessarily imply a bias towards being bullish on crypto (as all questions are denominated in fiat-collateralized stablecoins). There is less liquidity in that market than there used to be, but Polymarket is still a real-money market with $56,101 of liquidity, compared to Manifold, a play-money market with $16.09 equivalent worth of liquidity. I trust prediction markets to work, otherwise I wouldn't be here. The entire premise of a prediction market is that the "fake positivity" that Hagi talks about will be cancelled out by having to put your money where your mouth is. And if you trust Manifold's price more than you trust Polymarket's, go ahead and buy shares of NO on https://polymarket.com/market-group/ethereum-merge-pos. As for me, I think real-money markets are better at predicting these things.
BoltonBailey avatar
Bolton Bailey
bought Ṁ40 of NO
In fact, his slide says "Mid-2022 -1 month/+3 months", suggesting a probability around 25%.
BoltonBailey avatar
Bolton Bailey
bought Ṁ25 of NO
https://youtu.be/NPlmXdnPTEo?t=577 Consensys employee back in December saying most likely later than mid-2022. I don't know of anything that's happened since then to make this more likely.
PeterBerggren avatar
Peter Berggren
bought Ṁ10 of YES
Still bullish; Polymarket is 10% above us here. Granted, the crypto world is quite bullish on such things, but there's over $82,000 worth of liquidity in that market, compared to an amount of Manifold Dollars corresponding to $9.03 in this market. I don't trust a highly liquid real-money market to be less correct than a rather illiquid play-money market. Even if Polymarket does use crypto as its underlying tech, the fact that the NYSE uses computer systems doesn't mean that all tech stocks are overvalued. Doubling down on YES; intending to sell once it equalizes with Polymarket.
aps avatar
aps
sold Ṁ20 of YES
Initially had the same thought as Peter; hagi's comment convinced me that it may not be that easy. Since I don't know what's up in Ethereum land and don't follow the community, I won't bet here.
hagi avatar
hagi
bought Ṁ20 of NO
I'd think it's not unlikely that the percentage on Polymarket is way to optimistic, given the high amount of fake positivity in crypto communities. Insert "That's good for bitcoin" meme here
PeterBerggren avatar
Peter Berggren
bought Ṁ25 of YES
Trading here based on the value from Polymarket, which is a real-money market with quite a bit of liquidity. I trust that its market is more efficient than Manifold's, so I'm trading YES.
PatrickDelaney avatar
Patrick Delaney
bought Ṁ1 of NO
It's strange that whoever is doing this would put that in a difficult to find, temporary place that only a small segment of users would see rather than out in the open using the, "add to description feature," already available on the platform. That's interesting that someone figured out how to manipulate the market, but I guess market manipulation is conduct designed to actively deceive investors in a market, so in most contexts, like a federal securities context, it would be considered fraud. Of course this is a game so it might be considered, "cheating," rather than fraud, but then again, me tagging things as fraud is also part of the game.
dglid avatar
David Glidden
bought Ṁ1 of NO
@Pepe explained how he's manipulating this market to have it pop to the top of the volume leaderboard on Discord here: https://discord.com/channels/915138780216823849/938171760237477998/944309811368050708
PatrickDelaney avatar
Patrick Delaney
bought Ṁ1 of NO
Flagging this market for fraud because it seems manipulated. There is an extremely low chance that unknown parties would dump such huge amounts of bets in such quick succession this far out from the date, and in such, "round," numbers close to $70,000 or $80,000 at a time.
RLMgold avatar
Robert McIntyre (gold)
bought Ṁ1 of NO
WTF is going on with this market?
Q avatar
Q
bought Ṁ100 of NO
Proof of stake's acronym of POS is appropriate. There are a lot of issues with it as a consensus mechanism that the Beacon chain simply doesn't have solid answers to yet. I expect Vitalik & Co understand this and are pulling a bit of a Star Citizen with a perpetual $CURRENT_DATE + 6 months timeline.
Tetraspace avatar
Tetraspace
bought Ṁ24 of NO
47% on Polymarket, and my intuition was that it's sub-50% just because it's took so long already.