@(jabowery) > Poll "corrections" as election approaches matches 2016. What are you referring to? [/u/ajoerich](https://www.reddit.com/user/ajoerich/)'s [last version of his Everything Chart](https://www.reddit.com/r/fivethirtyeight/comments/jj34su/its_oct_27_2020_and_heres_a_snapshot_of_the/) compares key metrics of the 2016 and 2020 US presidential elections, and Biden's lead over Trump right now happens to both be higher than Clinton's lead in 2016 and not be decreasing nearly as steeply as Clinton's was around one week before the 2016 election. Fu...

Apparently this meeting is over and I can’t see anyone reporting that they decided to restrict emigration. I’m surprised that the community prediction hasn’t changed much since the meeting started.

From the San Francisco Chronicle: “In the 15 years before Floyd’s death, 110 officers have been charged with murder or manslaughter for on-duty fatal shootings [...] Just five have been convicted of murder, while 37 have been found guilty of lesser crimes”

— edited by Natalia_Mendonca

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned yet that an AI has already managed to score about average in the math section of the gaokao, China's national college entrance exam. According to [this page](http://www.xinhuanet.com//english/2017-06/07/c_136347963.htm), it scored 105 out of 150, and according to [this page](https://qz.com/998424/millions-of-chinese-students-and-a-robot-will-be-sitting-the-gaokao-chinas-most-gruelling-academic-exam/), 106 is the average for Chinese high schoolers (in a different version of the test). Also, according to the first link, i...

@HadiKhan I'd recommend not putting too much weight on any one particular poll. Poll aggregators, like FiveThirtyEight and PollyVote, have a higher signal-to-noise ratio.

— edited by Natalia_Mendonca

@holomanga It could be one single user putting all of their probability mass in August — perhaps in order to troll, perhaps not.

Wisconsin, which voted for Donald Trump in 2016, has been called by the AP for Biden.

@j.m. @casens Notice that this question does not resolve based on whether 2020 was warmer than 2016. It resolves based on whether the NASA GISS global average temperature for 2020 is published above that of 2016. Those are two different things, and the latter one is false. (Unless you average the reported average temperatures for each month, act as if you know the month figures to 5 s.f., and treat that as the NASA GISS global average temperature for 2020 instead of the number they themselves report.)

— edited by Natalia_Mendonca

@Tamay It seems that the Russian ambassador just confirmed an invasion in tonight's UNSC meeting. (I haven't confirmed this myself, but you can watch the meeting here)

— edited by Natalia_Mendonca

@PeterHurford Many of us have — the community median in this question dropped from 30-35% before Trump announced he tested positive for COVID-19 to around 23% afterwards.

— edited by Natalia_Mendonca

David Chalmers said, in a comment on a Facebook post:

this was an accidental partial leak and the figures displayed can't really be compared to 2009 for various reasons. full results should be released Monday.

I guess something needs to be done about all of the 2020 PhilPapers Survey-related Metaculus questions now.

The resolve date for this question seems unreasonably soon to me. Given that life expectancy calculators estimate that GRRM still has ~13.5 years left, according to comments below, and given that there is a very small chance that the final book of A Song Of Ice And Fire will be published in the next three years, it seems to me that by March 2023 this question will be unresolvable.

@(olliebase22) Something I've heard before — I can't recall exactly where — that attempts to explain that discrepancy is what I'd call the "Trump insurance hypothesis": the hypothesis that many people bet that Trump will win not necessarily because they think that's likely, but because they *value money more* in worlds in which Trump wins. Perhaps they expect some disaster to happen if he does, or perhaps the emotional pain they would experience in that scenario is great enough that they feel the need to offset it with the joy of winning a bet. If there ...
@(casens) > if there ends up being evidence of a secret pardon, we might revisit the question and reresolve as ambiguous. Why shouldn't it resolve positively in that situation? I think that if we wanted to take the resolution criteria for this question literally, it would make sense to resolve it ambiguously now, and then resolve it positively if there ever ends up being evidence of a secret pardon. And if we wanted to go by a more holistic approach and avoid creating an incentive for people to just predict 99%, it would make sense to resolve it nega...

@Tamay Do you happen to mean the 117th United States Congress? If so, yes.

@(Matthew_Barnett) In [Forbes's list](https://www.forbes.com/real-time-billionaires/), where his net worth is listed as $26.5B, he's at #70. (As to why Bloomberg and Forbes disagree so much, it seems to me that most of the difference might come down to Forbes adding almost all of Alameda Research's assets (~$13B) to his net worth, and Bloomberg only adding some fraction of it (~$4.5B) for some reason, even though [Bloomberg says](https://www.bloomberg.com/billionaires/profiles/sam-bankmanfried/) SBF owns almost all of Alameda Research.) *— edited by Na...
The resolution criterium for this question is quite bad, assuming that the intention was to figure out whether Anthropic's Claude is more popular than Google's Bard. If you look at the search interest for the term "claude" [over the past 5 years](https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&q=bard,claude), you'll see that it has barely changed at all in that timeframe. There has been no increase since Anthropic launched their model. The search interest over time is pretty much just a straight line, with a few spikes that are unrelated to An...
I entered all forecasts for Q1 and Q2 GDP growth I found in [this Bloomberg article](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-23/economists-see-u-s-facing-worst-ever-quarterly-contraction?srnd=premium) into [a spreadsheet](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Dky8VGhZsGWRgqnuaoJarfzLK3QFanVGJTiOhZCqfx0/edit?usp=sharing) and calculated a weighted average for Q2 GDP growth forecasts, weighting by how accurate each source's Q1 GDP growth prediction was. The weighted average is -26.55%. All of those predictions are from no later than early April, h...