So let’s get this straight: Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the president of Ukraine, shows up to a NATO summit wearing a black jacket and matching trousers, and somehow, that’s the most controversial thing he’s done lately.
I mean, the guy is leading his country in a war against Russian aggression, and the big controversy in his life is … clothes.
Specifically, whether those clothes counted as a “suit.”
Welcome to 2025, where $237 million in bets — yes, they’re bets, just stop it — hinged on Zelenskyy’s outfit, and where the final ruling didn’t come from a judge, jury, or tailor, but from something called an “oracle.” Not the wise kind. The crypto kind. Basically a bunch of token holders voting on what’s true.
Here’s what happened.
Polymarket — the crypto prediction platform Americans aren’t supposed to use (but do) — put up a market: Will Zelenskyy be photographed or filmed wearing a suit before July?
Seems straightforward enough.
On June 24, he’s at the NATO event, and multiple media outlets describe it as a suit. Fashion experts say it’s a suit. Even the designer confirms it’s a suit, “though not a traditional one,” the designer writes.
So that’s it, right?
Nope.
The oracle?
That’s not it after all, because Polymarket uses something called UMA’s “Optimistic Oracle,” which settles disputed markets by vote. People with UMA tokens stake their crypto and vote on the outcome. The more tokens you have, the more your vote counts. It’s like a courtroom where the richest juror gets to decide the verdict. (I think. Honestly, this confuses me, but I’m pretty sure I have it right.)
First, the oracle said yes, it’s a suit. Then no. Then finally, officially: not a suit.
And just like that, Polymarket traders who backed what certainly seems to me is the obvious answer — black suit, public event, cash the ticket — watched it all get reversed. A quarter-billion in volume, settled on “not a suit,” even though pretty much everyone outside the crypto voting pool saw one.
It’s not the first time the internet has gone sideways over clothes. Remember “the dress”? Back in 2015, a photo of a dress went viral — half the world saw blue and black, the other half swore it was white and gold. It was fun. Confusing, sure, but nobody gained or lost money.
Now imagine that same dress going to market, with millions on the line, and the final answer decided not by color or fabric, but by … a self-described decentralized “truth machine” that claims the ability to record any verifiable truth or data onto a blockchain.
Or ask sharp sports bettor Gina Fiore. She once bet Rihanna would wear pink during the Super Bowl halftime show — at 25/1. The outfit looked pink. But under the stadium lights? It looked red. Bet lost. Tough beat, but at least that was physics.
This one? This was token-weighted decision-making centered on a subjective market calling for some subjective determination. A lot of people are not happy. Some are using the controversy as an opportunity to elevate the federally regulated (though still very controversial) prediction market Kalshi, while some others are calling for cooler heads to prevail.
Be better
Prediction markets are supposed to be better than this. That’s the whole idea — use financial incentives to crowdsource “truth.” But when a few whales can tip the scales — no matter the evidence — it becomes a joke.
Zelenskyy wore a suit. Seems clear as day. That should’ve been the end of it.
But instead, we got a $237 million debate over buttons and tailoring — while, lest we forget, there’s an actual war going on. Cities under fire. People dying. And here we are, parsing fabric and buttons like it’s the Zapruder film, because someone posted a market and enough crypto holders decided they didn’t like what they saw.
Prediction markets are supposed to tell us something useful about the future. But this one? Not even close. And, in the end, flat out wrong, IMHO.
By the way, the dress is clearly white and gold.
