Here's my model. I might be doing some of the maths wrong, and some of the many parameters fed into it might be iffy. It basically expresses this idea: natural epidemics are quite common, and epidemics seeded from lab-acquired infections are much rarer, so you need strong evidence to adjust your posterior to anything much higher than a single-digit percentage chance.
If he continues to keep his promises, I believe he'll be re-elected. I pray for him every day and so far God has answered my prayers. GBU
HEll yeah dude
Of the four previous Ebola outbreaks that reached 200 deaths, one of them (the most recent) resulted in a death toll of > 400.
The number of deaths is still increasing (e.g. 9 deaths between the 9th and 16th of this month). There is no obvious increase or decrease in the gradient of deaths over time across the past month.
@KrisMoore Update: I've now had something like 10 PCR tests and an antibody test, all negative.
@Linch I have very marginally updated down from my base rate because I believe COVID-19 has slightly impaired the average competitor's preparation for the event. e.g. I think many countries have their teams coached by former competitors and other mathematicians, and I expect that there's been fewer coaching sessions than usual this year. Although maybe being in lockdown has given people more time to prepare...
Rewards as an incentive for authoring questions?
As a general point: More questions in the system is surely a good thing. Only < 300 binary questions have been resolved in Metaculus's lifetime. I feel that to get a real sense of the calibration of the community, of the best individual predictors, and of Metaculus's prediction formula, the sample size of resolved questions should ideally be 10x or 100x larger than it currently is.