07-30-2003, 03:56 PM
Skan,
Yes, I see that you have segregated your proposal from that of what existed under the Pentagon plan. When we enter the realm of the hypothetical, you definitely have an advantage, since it's your world and all :P
Either way, I donât see how something could pay off only in the prevention of an act. Furthermore, I donât see how if that is possible, that you could place bets on both sides of the event, both happening and not happening, akin to the "no pass" line in craps.
If I bet event X will happen on 1.1.04, and nothing happens, do I win because something was prevented? Or was there no threat in the first place? And if I'm able to bet that event X will not happen on 1.1.04, and nothing happens, do I win because I was correct?
In any event, this now becomes a theoretical discussion, much different than the original thread intent.
Yes, I see that you have segregated your proposal from that of what existed under the Pentagon plan. When we enter the realm of the hypothetical, you definitely have an advantage, since it's your world and all :P
Either way, I donât see how something could pay off only in the prevention of an act. Furthermore, I donât see how if that is possible, that you could place bets on both sides of the event, both happening and not happening, akin to the "no pass" line in craps.
If I bet event X will happen on 1.1.04, and nothing happens, do I win because something was prevented? Or was there no threat in the first place? And if I'm able to bet that event X will not happen on 1.1.04, and nothing happens, do I win because I was correct?
In any event, this now becomes a theoretical discussion, much different than the original thread intent.