I'd love to see a question or two about seasonal flu. I'm seeing a lot of discussion of how terrible it will be to have a serious flu season, plus covid, and a push for very high vaccination rates.
My personal prediction is that in most places, as it was in Australia, it is going to be a tiny fraction of a usual year, due to all the masks, closures, distancing, etc.
This seems like an important question.
@frxtz wrote:
@Anthony Wait, what? It's intentional that only graduate students qualify for the 3H? Not even professors? This is getting ridiculous.
Instead of a backdate prediction tachyon power I'd like to have a "cancel all predictions" power. At that level of required close reading I'll get a law degree first.
Well it resolves as ambiguous if there is no such test. It's pretty specific, but I'm more confident of my ability to cajole a few grad students into taking such a test than a few professors :->
Argh so many great ideas to add to the list!
But the great news is that we've just about completed brining on a long-needed developer, so more features should be appearing soon!
While pot-smoking Elon has been wasting his time recycling plastic bottle rockets, we've succeeded in a major breakthrough: clicking "markdown" will now open a separate tab, so there's no danger of any text loss for anyone, and no more loss of spectacular arguments.
@TamayBesiroglu wrote:
See jkaufman's google doc on probability estimates of cryonics success for several good factorisations from various people: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qn7c7…
Very nice. Perhaps we should make a cryonics series at some point.
@Fruo @bzial. Oops! Totally glossed over the second part of the resolution. Apologies, I guess I'm still jetlagged from a trip! Unresolved.
@frxtz Spam report button and @moderators are both coming very soon!
So far, the community score is crushing it, with an average log score of 0.035 over 10 binary questions. I don't expect that to last, but it's encouraging.
Also much better than the Metaculus prediction, which we need to look into.
I'm updating to a significant probability here because (a) he's now leaving office; (b) it seems very plausible that he's broken a lot of laws that can be prosecuted at the state and not just federal level; (c) precedent: Metaculus has historically been surprised by people in the Trump administration going to prison.
It has probably occurred to some predictors that there is an opportunity to gain lots of points by predicting a large number for this question, then making a contribution so as to cause that prediction to come to pass. I just want to assure everyone that this is perfectly acceptable.
PSA for forecasters to pay careful attention to the tails of your distributions. The data being solicited from the experts is in may cases 5%, 50% and 95% bands (NOT the 25-50-75 displayed on Metaculus), so be sure to use the CDF readout to make sure that you like the values your PDF is giving for these since they will be directly compared.
Looks like the comments above are that we will do what Amherst does. Strongly agree we should have this clarified by all parties before the next round.
I see a strong case for resolving at 959,056 (since this was the intention of Amherst, this was noted in another discussion, and it's in the spirit of the question.)
I see a pretty strong case, based on Metaculus precedent of being very literal with resolutions, for resolving at 931,698.
That makes a quite strong case of ambiguous resolution, or maybe even interpolating (i.e. splitting the difference.)