A recent prediction market has revealed a typical case of information asymmetry. A trader invested over $30,000 in a low-probability event, and less than 24 hours after the event was announced, they made over $400,000 in profit, with a return exceeding 10 times. The key point is that market movements preceded official announcements by several hours—this time gap was exploited precisely.

Even more interesting, someone claimed to infer the timing of military actions by monitoring a surge in pizza delivery orders near the Pentagon. It sounds like a joke, but in real money-driven prediction markets, any information gap can be turned into profit.

This incident directly triggered a response from the U.S. Congress. Representative Torres subsequently proposed a bill with a straightforward core demand: people with inside information about the government should not be allowed to trade in political policy prediction markets.

The logic is simple—stock trading is strictly regulated against insider trading, so why can prediction markets legally profit from information gaps? This is not only a regulatory loophole but also a question of market fairness.

Current discussions have expanded from individual traders to the gray areas of political and prediction markets. How the SEC and CFTC will regulate such markets in the future, and how to define the boundaries of "inside information," are likely to be key points. This wave of controversy could trigger a deeper round of regulatory changes.