--- title: "Please Enjoy Laughing at the Prediction Markets, in Full Meltdown, After Time’s “Person of the Year” Reveal" description: "Those who bet on who would be named Time's \"Person of the Year\" on prediction markets were absolutely furious at the announcement." date: "2025-12-11" modified: "2025-12-11" authors: - name: "Victor Tangermann" job_title: "Senior Editor" link: "https://futurism.com/authors/victor" url: "https://futurism.com/future-society/prediction-markets-meltdown-time-person-of-the-year" categories: - "Artificial Intelligence" - "Ethics" - "Future Society" --- # Please Enjoy Laughing at the Prediction Markets, in Full Meltdown, After Time’s “Person of the Year” Reveal ![Those who bet on who would be named Time's "Person of the Year" on prediction markets were absolutely furious at the announcement.]() *Getty / Futurism* Just as many had [predicted](), *Time* magazine once again took some liberties with its annual "Person of the Year" issue. Besides [blocking users from reading its website with an AI chatbot](), the magazine anointed the "architects of AI" as its most important visionaries of 2025, eschewing the definition of "person" yet again. The eyeroll-inducing announcement was met with plenty of incredulity, especially considering the [astronomical amount of money]() being spent on building out data centers, their [enormous carbon footprint](), and a [whole litany of other ethical conundrums]() that the embrace of generative AI has spawned. One online group was particularly irked by *Time*'s announcement. As author Parker Molloy [pointed out on Bluesky](), those who [bet on who would be named "Person of the Year]()" on prediction markets were absolutely furious — perfectly illustrating the risks of throwing money at unregulated gambling websites. "Someone please explain to me how this is not a trick?" one user [complained]() after betting on billionaire Elon Musk on Kalshi. "Person of the year is a singular title..." "This is actually so freaking stupid," another [user]() seethed. Other users who had bet on "AI" argued that Kalshi owed them money. "This pretty clearly should've resolved to yes," one user [wrote](). "If you bought AI, reach out to Kalshi support because 'AI' is literally on the cover and in the title 'Architects of AI.'" Many argued it was stupid to bet on "AI," given the purpose of *Time*'s annual issue. "Stop complaining AI didn’t win," one user [wrote](). "AI was never going to win because of the technicality that *Time* would never state AI as 'person of the year' and would rather be 'technology' or some variant." The bet turned out to be a major driver, generating just shy of $20 million worth of bets since early November 2024. The clear frontrunner for most of the year was Musk, who was overtaken by Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang following his pro-AI rallying cry [during a keynote in Washington, DC](). "AI," meanwhile, steadily rose in trading since May. "If AI is Time Person of the Year for 2025, then the market resolves to Yes," reads the [rules summary](). "If there is no Person of the Year (and instead many variations thereof, e.g. Entertainer of the Year, Hero of the Year), that is not encompassed in the Payout Criterion. If multiple persons win, all persons that are listed are encompassed within the Payout Criterion." A [similar bet on Polymarket]() saw most money going towards NBA legend LeBron James and president Donald Trump. The comments section also turned into a flame war, with unhappy users accusing the site of a "[rug pull]()." "Such a scam," one Polymarket user complained. "If i would of known a new option would of been added that says effectively AI or EVERYONE ELSE I would of chosen that." Perhaps users on prediction market websites should've known better. *Time* magazine has a long history of making controversial choices for its splashy annual cover. Besides picking infamous leaders like Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin in 1938 and 1939, respectively, the publication has also taken plenty of liberties in the past, stretching the definition of "person" to an extreme degree. In 1960, for instance, [it chose "US scientists,"]() which is arguably an even vaguer descriptor than the "architects of AI." In 2006, it chose "you," an infuriating and borderline nonsensical pick that was meant to recognize people who created user-generated content on then-ascendant social platforms like MySpace and YouTube. Meanwhile, users on social media gleefully watched as prediction market users were having a meltdown. "I can’t believe an unregulated gambling market let people bet frivolously and then took all their money," one Bluesky user [wrote](). **More on *Time*'s Person of the Year:** [*Time Magazine Deploys AI “Ask Me Anything” Box That Covers Up Its Actual Journalism and Can’t Be Closed*]() ## Author I've been at Futurism since 2017, where my role has evolved to encompass design, writing, and increasingly editing. I've always been fascinated by space exploration and advanced transportation, which I've leaned into by interviewing luminaries in those fields while closely following the dimensions of policy and regulation that allow next-generation projects to succeed -- or, sometimes, to fail. I'm also keenly interested in the effects of generative AI on society, policies, and democratic institutions, as well as clean energy, physics and biology, and the vagaries of tech leadership. My work for Futurism has been cited by publications including Ars Technica, Gizmodo, PC Magazine, Jalopnik, Fox News, and the New York Post. I spent my childhood living in locations including Manila, the Philippines, and Geneva, Switzerland, attended McGill University, and now live in Toronto, Canada. Before Futurism I worked at AskMen and a small photography studio. In my free time, I'm an avid gardener, foodie, and craft beer lover, as well as a maker of artisanal hot pepper sauces. I have a magnificent dog named Freida. ### Author social links [Bluesky]()