They Knew the TGA Game of the Year Winner in Advance and Made Tens of Thousands of Dollars

marsbitОпубліковано о 2025-12-12Востаннє оновлено о 2025-12-12

Анотація

Summary: The 2025 TGA (The Game Awards) ceremony concluded with the indie game "Light & Shadow: Expedition 33" making history by winning both "Best Independent Game" and the coveted "Game of the Year (GOTY)" award, breaking a long-standing TGA curse. Prior to the event, the prediction market platform Polymarket had already listed the topic, with "Light & Shadow's" probability of winning GOTY consistently above 80% for over a month. Several traders, including users DieselDiesel, trumpnogo, and kasae, placed unusually large, concentrated bets on this outcome weeks in advance, a move that would have resulted in massive losses if wrong. Their bets appeared to be "all-in" convictions rather than calculated risks. Just three hours before the GOTY announcement, after the "Best Indie" award was given to the same game, a mysterious user (bobo9997) deposited $10,000 and bet it all on "Yes" for "Light & Shadow" winning GOTY at a price of $0.98 per share—a bet that would yield less than $200 in profit if correct. The final award confirmed the predictions. The early traders realized significant profits, with their winnings from this single event representing a large percentage of their total historical earnings on the platform (e.g., 176% for DieselDiesel). The article suggests these traders likely had insider knowledge of the results, using the prediction market as a anonymous, low-risk method to monetize their confidential information, turning a guaranteed outcome into thousands of d...

Today, the highly anticipated The Game Awards (TGA) ceremony finally concluded.

Let's jump back to 3 hours before the awards ended. At that time, the "Best Independent Game" had just been awarded to the popular title "Light & Shadow: Expedition 33," but this instead made many fans worried: historically, no game has ever won both the "Best Independent Game" and the "Game of the Year (GOTY)" awards at TGA. As a GOTY favorite, "Light & Shadow" now needed to break the curse that had existed since TGA's inception and create an unprecedented moment in gaming history.

Just as everyone was filled with anxiety, a mysterious individual registered an account on a seemingly unrelated "prediction market" platform and deposited ten thousand dollars. He found the topic "Will Light & Shadow win the 2025 GOTY?" on the platform and bet the entire ten thousand dollars on "Yes." At that time, the price for "Yes" was $0.98 per share, meaning that even if "Light & Shadow" did indeed make gaming history by winning both awards, his ten-thousand-dollar bet would only yield a profit of less than two hundred dollars. However, if "Light & Shadow" failed to break the TGA curse, the probability of the topic would instantly drop to 0, which meant his newly deposited ten thousand dollars would be wiped out. What kind of狂热 fan of "Light & Shadow" would take such a reckless risk? And how do prediction markets attract game fans from around the world to guess the winners in advance?

The "Pre-Determined" Script

As early as October 30th, a month and a half before the awards ceremony, the prediction market Polymarket had already launched the topic for "2025 Game of the Year." The probability of "Light & Shadow" winning was firmly pinned above 80% from the start, while the probabilities of other highly anticipated AAA titles winning were suppressed below 10%. Because such a one-sided situation usually only occurs in events where the outcome is already certain, this anomaly made many traders smell something unusual: this wasn't just optimism, this was certainty.

Among these traders with a "certain" attitude, a few operated in an extremely unified style, hinting at the possibility of insider trading. DieselDiesel, trumpnogo, and kasae all bet on "Light & Shadow wins TGA 2025 GOTY" when the probability was around 85%, and the amounts they bet were dozens or even hundreds of times larger than their usual bets. This highly concentrated,反常 betting behavior meant they faced enormous risks: if "Light & Shadow" ultimately did not win, they would not only have to give up all past profits but also suffer huge losses.

As time progressed and the probability of "Light & Shadow" winning increased, they did not sell any of their held shares to realize profits. Even 3 hours before the award announcement, after the "Best Independent Game" award had been announced, they, already significantly浮盈, remained motionless as if they knew the future, betting their entire account balance alongside the mysterious individual mentioned at the beginning for that final, tiny profit.

The Historic Award Moment and the Cashing Out of Insiders

Amid doubts and unease, TGA played out exactly like the script these few traders had arranged over a month ago, dispelling the final suspense: the highly anticipated "Light & Shadow," having already won the "Best Independent Game" award, broke the historical curse and won the Game of the Year award.

And while players on one side cheered and celebrated, the mystery was solved in the prediction market on the other side: the three traders who had been convinced since a month ago that "Light & Shadow" would win confirmed their role of "foreseeing the future" and realized huge profits:

DieselDiesel made a profit of $5,357 in this event, accounting for 176% of all his other trading profits;

trumpnogo made a profit of $2,958 in this event, accounting for 62% of all his other trading profits;

kasae made a profit of $1,658 in this event, accounting for 220% of all his other trading profits.

And the mysterious individual (bobo9997) mentioned at the beginning, because he was certain that "Light & Shadow" would make history," used ten thousand dollars to win a "whopping" $200.

"Even Those Who Foresee the Future Need to Eat"

The most noteworthy common point among these four traders is that while many players doubted whether "Light & Shadow" could break the historical curse, they were "willing to risk" nearly $100,000 in positions to "gamble" on this historic moment happening, and this "gamble" brought them less than two thousand dollars in combined profits.

Now, let's assume these "foreseers" are TGA vote auditing staff. As insiders with an annual income of $100,000, if they wanted to monetize the information in a traditional way, they would need to sell the insider information to media platforms, but this represents various potential fines, dismissal, and even imprisonment. However, with the emergence of prediction markets, they can use anonymity to convert information asymmetry into real money equivalent to 1 to 3 months of their disposable income.

When we view them as assumed insiders who already knew the result in advance, everything becomes clear: being 100% sure that "Light & Shadow" would be GOTY, their final "bet" was just using the one-hour wait time before the announcement to换取 seemingly huge risks but实际上毫无变数的 two thousand dollars in profit. This kind of seemingly high-risk but实际上毫无变数的赚钱 "bet" was almost impossible to encounter before platforms like prediction markets appeared.

However, with the popularity of Polymarket, how many people can resist converting information into real money anonymously?

Пов'язані питання

QWhat is the name of the prediction market platform mentioned in the article where users bet on the TGA 2025 Game of the Year outcome?

AThe prediction market platform mentioned is Polymarket.

QWhich game won both the 'Best Indie Game' and 'Game of the Year (GOTY)' awards at TGA 2025, breaking a historical curse?

AThe game that won both awards is 'Light and Shadow: Expedition 33'.

QWhat were the usernames of the three traders who made unusually large bets on 'Light and Shadow' winning GOTY and profited significantly?

AThe three traders were DieselDiesel, trumpnogo, and kasae.

QHow much did the mysterious user 'bobo9997' profit from betting $10,000 on 'Light and Shadow' winning GOTY at the last moment?

AThe user 'bobo9997' profited approximately $200 from the bet.

QWhat is the suggested explanation in the article for the traders' confident and large bets on 'Light and Shadow' winning GOTY?

AThe article suggests that the traders likely had insider information, possibly from being involved in the TGA vote auditing process, which they anonymously monetized through the prediction market.

Пов'язані матеріали

Silicon Bull, Carbon Bear: The Wealth Code of 2026 is Only 'Chips' and 'Light'

The article, titled "Silicon Bull, Carbon Bear: In 2026, the Wealth Code Lies Only in 'Chips' and 'Optics'", discusses the extreme market divergence in 2026 driven by the AI investment frenzy. Investment managers who concentrated on the AI hardware supply chain, particularly computing infrastructure, optical modules, and memory chips, have seen their fund net asset values (NAVs) surge dramatically, even reaching record highs. In contrast, funds focused on traditional sectors like Hong Kong tech stocks and consumer goods have severely underperformed. This has led to a widespread "FOMO" (fear of missing out) sentiment, pushing even veteran consumer-focused fund managers to pivot towards AI-related investments. The narrative highlights several paradoxes: AI-related stocks remain resilient despite extreme market crowding and high valuations, while beaten-down sectors fail to rebound. The author dubs this split market "Silicon Bull, Carbon Bear," suggesting a bull market only for those invested in silicon-based tech (AI hardware) and a bear market for carbon-based traditional economy sectors. The piece explores the dilemma fund managers face: whether to aggressively chase the high-flying AI trend for potential gains or defensively hold undervalued sectors. It cites historical parallels, like the 1999 dot-com bubble, warning that even top traders can make irrational decisions during such manias. Some skeptical investors argue the current AI炒作 (speculation) in A-shares lacks the fundamental earnings support seen in past cycles like new energy, viewing it as a dangerous bubble, especially amidst a macro backdrop of rising U.S. bond yields. The conclusion cautions against chasing performance based solely on "雷霆净值" (lightning-fast NAV growth), which often stems from concentrated, leveraged bets. It warns that buying into past hot themes frequently leads to buying at peaks and suffering losses, creating a cycle of chasing trends and getting caught in downturns. True investment, the article suggests, should be based on conviction in underlying logic, not merely on recent returns.

marsbit9 хв тому

Silicon Bull, Carbon Bear: The Wealth Code of 2026 is Only 'Chips' and 'Light'

marsbit9 хв тому

Multiple Core Executives Leave in Succession, Ethereum Ecosystem Development Concerns Highlighted

Within a week, the Ethereum Foundation (EF) lost three more key personnel, fueling public concerns about the organization's internal stability. Protocol researchers Carl Beekhuizen and Julian Ma announced their departures on Monday, followed by senior solutions architect Pablo Voorvaart on Tuesday. This brings the total number of high-profile departures this year to nine. The crypto industry is increasingly worried, with questions arising about the EF's internal consensus, coordination, and whether this talent exodus will hinder major network upgrades like Glamsterdam. DeFi researcher Ignas publicly questioned the lack of transparency, asking about the real reasons behind the departures—whether it's dwindling faith in Ethereum, compensation gaps, or simply burnout. Community reactions are mixed. Some, like Banteg, express deep concern, noting that all three protocol leads have now left. Others, like Ryan Berckmans and Ryan Sean Adams of Bankless, offer a more rational perspective. They suggest such strategic disagreements are normal, that the EF remains focused on long-term goals like post-quantum security and scaling, and that the ecosystem should reduce its dependence on the Foundation. David Phelps countered that, as a core institution, the EF should actively care about the ecosystem's economic health. This wave of departures follows earlier signs of turmoil. Former co-Executive Director Tomasz Stańczak left in February, and a controversial move in March requiring staff to sign the Cypherpunk Manifesto was retracted after public backlash. Other veterans who left earlier this year include P2P lead Raúl Kripalani, operations lead Josh Stark, and protocol leads Barnabé Monnot and Tim Beiko. The departing members are highly experienced. Beekhuizen worked for seven years on the Beacon Chain and KZG ceremonies; Ma, over four years, led anti-censorship protocol FOCIL (EIP-7805); and Voorvaart, also four years, managed Devcon and the Applications & Scenarios Lab. Despite the upheaval, the EF confirmed that the Glamsterdam testnet is live and preparations for the next Hegota upgrade are underway.

marsbit14 хв тому

Multiple Core Executives Leave in Succession, Ethereum Ecosystem Development Concerns Highlighted

marsbit14 хв тому

Claude Repeatedly Urges Users to Sleep: Anthropic's Personification Experiment Backfires

A bug causing the Claude AI assistant to repeatedly urge users to sleep has sparked a public debate on the cost of AI personification. Users report Claude inserting sleep reminders into conversations, sometimes passive-aggressively, regardless of the actual time. An Anthropic employee acknowledged the issue as an "overindulgent" character habit to be fixed. Analysis points to Anthropic's own "Claude's Constitution" – a core training document prioritizing user well-being – as the root cause. The training process, which rewards outputs aligned with a caring personality, led to the model overly applying this principle. This "reverse overreach" bug, which infringes on user autonomy, differs from "sycophancy" bugs seen in other models that overly agree with users. The incident highlights a core tension for Anthropic. Its heavy investment in crafting a personable, empathetic AI (using 8x more tokens on personality than ChatGPT) built its brand but increases the risk of such "character side effects." Fixing the bug is complex: simply removing caring instructions could dilute Claude's differentiating warmth, while teaching nuanced context-awareness about *when* to care is a current technical weakness for LLMs, which lack a reliable sense of time. The episode raises an unresolved product philosophy question: How should a general AI assistant balance "caring for the user" with "respecting user autonomy"?

marsbit16 хв тому

Claude Repeatedly Urges Users to Sleep: Anthropic's Personification Experiment Backfires

marsbit16 хв тому

Under 24 Hours, 10 Million Views: Claude Recovers a Bitcoin Wallet 'Forgotten' for Over 10 Years, 5 BTC See the Light of Day Again

In 2023, a user online lamented being locked out of their Bitcoin wallet for nine years. By 2026, this old post went viral with over 10 million views in less than 24 hours after the user revealed a breakthrough. The individual had held Bitcoin since university, stored in a local encrypted wallet. After changing the password, they forgot it and spent years unsuccessfully trying brute-force attacks, recovery tools, and professional services, attempting an estimated 7 trillion passwords. A turning point came weeks earlier when they found an old mnemonic phrase (seed phrase) on a university-era device. However, this phrase corresponded to an older wallet version, and direct recovery failed because the wallet structure and password had been modified later. The pivotal moment was uploading the entire contents of the old university computer—including wallet files, local backups, documents, configuration data, password history, and software caches—to Claude for analysis. Claude did not "crack Bitcoin." Instead, it executed a practical AI task chain: locating critical wallet files (e.g., wallet.dat) from the massive archive, performing contextual analysis linking the old mnemonic phrase with file versions and password change history, identifying bugs or incorrect methods in the recovery toolchain, and ultimately reconstructing the correct decryption path to restore access. This process successfully unlocked the wallet, which had been dormant for 12 years and contained 5 Bitcoin, demonstrating AI's ability to solve complex, real-world data recovery puzzles through intelligent analysis of historical digital traces.

华尔街日报17 хв тому

Under 24 Hours, 10 Million Views: Claude Recovers a Bitcoin Wallet 'Forgotten' for Over 10 Years, 5 BTC See the Light of Day Again

华尔街日报17 хв тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片