Would seem to be an arbitrage opportunity between established and under-established prediction markets - a condition which would not only appear to contradict the unique market mechanism of an incentive adjusting prediction market but distort the outcome given insufficient time and information. I’m sure this is not a novel suggestion. I’m not that smart.
Betting on a statistical question seems like it might work. But a question like "who's responsible?" seems like it depends on the decision of an "expert" which defeats the purpose.
When you say that the people who voted that the Palestinians were responsible "were correct". As decided by whom? Or are you people just guessing the direction most people will vote. Trying to understand here.
If you can win real money then who gets to make the final call as to who is right? If its webmaster Bob who pulls the lever then every question should start with "How will Bob decide the following".
Would be nice to have a button "Make suggestion" through which a modal opens in which you can write an idea for a prediction question.
Also since you said there are legal difficulties in the US and the fact that most questions are pretty US-centric I guess there could be some potential for more European themes.
I love the question with betting on the replication of superconductivity. Would be interesting to have questions about other technologies and trend topics like AI. There is so much bs what people say about the great potential and how it will change everything etc. but would be interesting to see where people actually put their money at
> To this layman observer, supporters of the Israelis and Palestinians both seemed to make equally plausible arguments. But early on prediction markets overwhelmingly said that it was likely the Palestinian side that was responsible, and they were correct.
> For those of us who go through life constantly shaking our heads at how much foolishness is out there, prediction markets are a miracle device.
Are they a miracle device? The question the markets are answering in this example is not "who was responsible for hitting the hospital?", even if that's how it's phrased. The question is "who was responsible for hitting the hospital, according to the judge who resolves this question?".
This is a case where reality is difficult to perceive. You initially had no opinion on who hit the hospital, and now you have a very strong one. ("Prediction markets said... and they were correct.") Does the strength of the evidence justify the strength of your new opinion?
The more people tend to look to the opinion of prediction markets, the higher the risk that on any particular issue, the opinion of the market is accepted as true for no other reason than that it is the prediction of the market. This would be an exact mirror of how public opinion has always formed. What would the functioning of the market be adding? Well, it would offer monetary rewards for correctly predicting/swaying the movement of public opinion. But that would also be an exact mirror of how public opinion has always formed.
Averaging rates between schools is a naive way to do it. It should be weighted by the number of students in each school for that year. Yale’s class size is much smaller than Columbia’s.
If we account for class size, % black for 2027 is 14.9, not 14.3
I think this ride is just getting started. Remember - paperclips or not, the AGI *will* settle on ETH as the rigorous framework for property rights in the digital realm.
I think the Ivy League market resolving 'yes' if there is no data is a mistake. They might choose to restrict what data they release to minimize legal risk, if they are still pumping the numbers artificially high
Just want to register that 30 % for Israel controlling Gaza City (which is only northern part of the Gaza Strip) by December 1 is imho too low, depending on your definition of "control". Yea, I am too lazy and risk averse to register on that market.
They had drafted large part of their population into the army (over 300 000 out of 10 million!), which is long-term economically unsustainable; at the same time, it is politically untenable to sent reservists back home without accomplishing anything. They'll likely go all in.
Regarding democracy, though you are correct generally, note that federal spending/total voters in 2020 is $39,583. So the per-vote impact can be large - and this would be an argument for a random-ballot system since that makes it possible for any vote to be tipping point?
Fantastic.
I'd like to fill this comment out with something more but really, that's all.
Would seem to be an arbitrage opportunity between established and under-established prediction markets - a condition which would not only appear to contradict the unique market mechanism of an incentive adjusting prediction market but distort the outcome given insufficient time and information. I’m sure this is not a novel suggestion. I’m not that smart.
Betting on a statistical question seems like it might work. But a question like "who's responsible?" seems like it depends on the decision of an "expert" which defeats the purpose.
When you say that the people who voted that the Palestinians were responsible "were correct". As decided by whom? Or are you people just guessing the direction most people will vote. Trying to understand here.
If you can win real money then who gets to make the final call as to who is right? If its webmaster Bob who pulls the lever then every question should start with "How will Bob decide the following".
Would be nice to have a button "Make suggestion" through which a modal opens in which you can write an idea for a prediction question.
Also since you said there are legal difficulties in the US and the fact that most questions are pretty US-centric I guess there could be some potential for more European themes.
I love the question with betting on the replication of superconductivity. Would be interesting to have questions about other technologies and trend topics like AI. There is so much bs what people say about the great potential and how it will change everything etc. but would be interesting to see where people actually put their money at
> To this layman observer, supporters of the Israelis and Palestinians both seemed to make equally plausible arguments. But early on prediction markets overwhelmingly said that it was likely the Palestinian side that was responsible, and they were correct.
> For those of us who go through life constantly shaking our heads at how much foolishness is out there, prediction markets are a miracle device.
Are they a miracle device? The question the markets are answering in this example is not "who was responsible for hitting the hospital?", even if that's how it's phrased. The question is "who was responsible for hitting the hospital, according to the judge who resolves this question?".
This is a case where reality is difficult to perceive. You initially had no opinion on who hit the hospital, and now you have a very strong one. ("Prediction markets said... and they were correct.") Does the strength of the evidence justify the strength of your new opinion?
The more people tend to look to the opinion of prediction markets, the higher the risk that on any particular issue, the opinion of the market is accepted as true for no other reason than that it is the prediction of the market. This would be an exact mirror of how public opinion has always formed. What would the functioning of the market be adding? Well, it would offer monetary rewards for correctly predicting/swaying the movement of public opinion. But that would also be an exact mirror of how public opinion has always formed.
Averaging rates between schools is a naive way to do it. It should be weighted by the number of students in each school for that year. Yale’s class size is much smaller than Columbia’s.
If we account for class size, % black for 2027 is 14.9, not 14.3
Good idea, will sign up tomorrow.
Speaking of predictions, my repeated exhortations to buy crypto from June to last month are going quite well.
https://twitter.com/powerfultakes/status/1672286213326372864
I think this ride is just getting started. Remember - paperclips or not, the AGI *will* settle on ETH as the rigorous framework for property rights in the digital realm.
I think the Ivy League market resolving 'yes' if there is no data is a mistake. They might choose to restrict what data they release to minimize legal risk, if they are still pumping the numbers artificially high
Just want to register that 30 % for Israel controlling Gaza City (which is only northern part of the Gaza Strip) by December 1 is imho too low, depending on your definition of "control". Yea, I am too lazy and risk averse to register on that market.
They had drafted large part of their population into the army (over 300 000 out of 10 million!), which is long-term economically unsustainable; at the same time, it is politically untenable to sent reservists back home without accomplishing anything. They'll likely go all in.
Regarding democracy, though you are correct generally, note that federal spending/total voters in 2020 is $39,583. So the per-vote impact can be large - and this would be an argument for a random-ballot system since that makes it possible for any vote to be tipping point?
Does the war in Israel and the scrutiny universities are getting for being woke and anti-Israel make you update on Harvard-SFFA at all?
Used to be that “betting on beliefs” required time on the battlefield.
The "how to deposit" link isn't working for me