I'm excited to announce that the wise and veteran Metaculite @gjm will help out with some moderating on Metaculus!
I knew we should not have put the servers in Nevada...
If @datscilly doesn't get bored and lazy, probably some time in the next year. There are a few factors here. The question volume is up and I haven't been keeping up. Many questions now are range questions, which are harder to just 'wing it' for a good prediction.
Also my usual access pattern is on my phone when I have a spare moment, and the UI is broken to near unusability for range questions from the android browser. If @max.wainwright would fix the UI for android use it might give me some extra months.
I understand that Metaculites may experience some unease over this question, since it seems very unlikely to resolve positively, even given my generous resolution criterion. However, I think it's an important question in order to keep journalists and public health policy analysts in check. These types of questions demonstrate how informed communities of amateur predictors can often outperform the experts.
— edited by Matthew_Barnett
At 67 points lost with a prediction of 19%, this has got to be my worst-scoring prediction that I'm proud of.
I really, really want a hoody.
@AnthonyQuestions should just resolve as originally planned. Otherwise, people could always change the resolution criteria later.
There's a solution to the "can't lose points" side of this question: As its very last act before closing, a doomed Metaculus could resolve this question negatively and spank the predictors who thought they had a one-sided wager ;)
I have invested a significant portion of my savings in Bitcoin, so I am going to be pretty happy if it goes to 100,000 $. But I think it is very unlikely to do so soon: 2 trillion $ of marketcap is a lot of money and to sustain it you would need very high spot volume (unreasonably high). Btw, you should be more respectful of other people opinions if you want to engage in a public forum, especially one that's focus on discussing rationally as Metaculus. This isn't the place to circlejerk.
«Crazy jabowery thinks a victory over Sleepy Joe is as improbable as Randell Mill's Grand Unified Theory of Classical Physics. SAD!»
@ThirdEyeOpen I'll happily give you 6:1, which should be a snap for you if you actually believe the 42% and aren't just posturing.
@j.m. I think this is pretty mean. Some people had no choice but to put themselves at higher risk, which doesn't indicate lack of conscientiousness, others were not conscientious and just got lucky.
e.g. At least one person who didn't qualify due to join date but did test positive happens to have been legally required to put themself at considerable risk compared to the population. I've been lucky so far and not got it but am also in that camp due to my profession.