#Polymarket预测市场 In three days, the probability of Bitcoin breaking through $100,000 fell from 33% to 30%, then rebounded to 40%—watching these numbers fluctuate on Polymarket, I suddenly remembered my days in gold farming games.

It was the same back then, staring at the data fluctuations every day, as if I understood the future trends. But the key question arises: can the probabilities from these prediction markets really guide decision-making?

To be honest, I am currently cautious about these types of prediction tools. There is nothing wrong with the data itself, but there are several traps behind it that are worth being vigilant about:

First, the composition of market participants determines the price. If large players are involved, the volatility becomes a game of chips rather than a reflection of real probabilities.

Second, the "certainty" created by short-term fluctuations is the most lethal. A rebound from 33% to 40% can easily create the illusion of a "trend forming," and as a result, the moment people chase high prices is often the beginning of a fall.

Thirdly, prediction markets are essentially zero-sum games. When someone wins, someone must lose, and those who monitor repeatedly like miners often become liquidity providers who are drained.

My suggestion is simple: you can refer to this type of data as supplementary information, but be sure not to take it as a basis for decision-making. Whether Bitcoin can reach $100,000 depends on macro policies, institutional attitudes, on-chain activities, and other factors; a prediction market's probability fluctuations cannot change the fundamentals.

The secret to living longer is to ask yourself the clearer the data you see, the more you should ask – who benefits from this data? Who profits from it?