The hardest part of a prediction market is not predicting the future. It is agreeing on what actually happened. Take Polymarket. A market like “Will company X launch product Y before December 31?” sounds binary until reality gives you a private beta, a limited regional release, a product rename, or an announcement with no usable product. A normal smart contract can distribute funds after receiving YES or NO, but it cannot read all that evidence and decide what “launched” really means. This is where @GenLayer could supercharge prediction markets. An Intelligent Contract could read the market rules, examine real-world sources, and ask multiple validators running different AI models to evaluate the outcome independently. They would need to reach consensus, with disagreement and appeals handled by the network rather than trusting one company or one AI model to make the final call. To me, the real opportunity is not resolving more obvious markets about scores or election results. It is safely creating markets around questions that require interpretation: whether a roadmap milestone was genuinely delivered, whether a policy took effect, whether research met its stated criteria, or whether an AI agent completed a task as agreed. Polymarket showed that people want markets on real-world events. GenLayer could help expand what “resolvable” means when the real world refuses to give us a clean YES or NO