Thank you for the details, i understand the problem better now. Maybe you could put aside some yield from fees to an "insurance fund". This fund could be used to mitigate the impact on users in case of the cancellation of a market. This would only be possible if a cancellation is a rare case, otherwise the fund would never get to a decent level ;) All in all this is a problem to be addressed later on i guess.

This sounds nice, as long as the team is not invested in the bets it resolves. I do not suggest this is the case, i just want to highlight the contra of centralized resolving.

Regarding the cancelation of a market: would it be possible to refund at the individual price the participants entered the market? Otherwise it would not really be a refund but more like a forced liquidation at marketprice.

I like the concept of decentralized prediction markets a lot but i have seen the shortcommings from decentralized prediction markets. Maybe you can help me understand with 2 real life examples how predyx would handle those better:

One good example would be what happened in polymarket.

The market was "who wins the venezuelan election" with the primary source "venezuelan official statement". So most participants betted Maduro Yes, because they expected it to be rigged. And the official statement was as expected: Maduro won. There was a catch though. The second source was "consensus of reporting". The market went through UMA multiple times and resulted in Maduro No.

How would you avoid this mess? Only a single source of truth?

Another example: "Will Kennedy withdraw from the presidential race by Friday" (The Friday he announced supporting the Trump campaign)

The market resolved to yes despite Kennedy repeatedly stating that he will only suspend his campaign while still running in the race. He made a deal to withdraw from the ballot in some states while still running in most states and even applying for new states. He also explained a way how he still can become president.

Things like those destroyed trust in the platform and made people think twice if they are really betting the event or betting on betting the event.

So please explain for the two examples how you would avoid this problem. There is a lot of money at stake and actors from both positions (yes and no) will try to influence how the market resolves, also using scam tactics.

How do you plan to resolve markets? Especially when they are controversial.

Living in a world that often feels like it's getting worse rather than better, I sometimes question whether having children was the right decision. After all, they will likely face more challenges than I did. However, I always find comfort in knowing that the world is better with them in it, and it would be worse without them. This gives me hope that humanity might eventually focus on what truly matters and come together to address the challenges we all face. Perhaps the next generation will be better than mine and those that came before.

This week i am working on 3 things.

I have to present the results of a research project next week. It’s only a few minutes long, but it still requires preparation.

I am developing a data collection and storage system based on microservices to allow students to work with real data on the university's energy consumption. The goal is to identify areas where energy use can be reduced and measure the impact of green policy decisions made by the university.

Apples are ready for harvest, time to make some delicious juice :)

This is a highly concerning issue, not only in the USA. I am a German scientist currently working in the field of IoT forensics, and I constantly have to ensure that I do not overstep legal boundaries, which significantly hinders my ability to conduct thorough research. For example, if I were to extract cloud tokens from an IoT device and use them to access my own account on the manufacturer's cloud, it could be considered computer sabotage, potentially resulting in imprisonment.

Even if I were to win such a case, there's a strong possibility that my equipment would be confiscated for months, effectively preventing me from working. The university would not provide support, as they generally avoid getting involved in the legal matters of their researchers.

I hope videos are ok. It is just so hilarious and true 😅

The position is inherently temporary, as it relies on third-party funding and is project-based. It can be difficult to reconcile this temporary nature with my family commitments. I truly enjoy working in science, and I do not take this decision lightly; nonetheless, it may become necessary for me to seek other opportunities in the future.

On personal experience, i disagree with instagibbs. I know no one personally in the crypto space that has no self-custody. Most of them have CEX accounts as well, but not all of them. How is your personal experience? Maybe i just live in a bubble.