@Based unless the AI overlords decide to put smart humans in charge of human affairs, in which case your Metaculus score is a strong signal of your superior smartness.
Sorry for the double-resolution, it turns out 1.8 is not the same as 1817502.
Hello everybody. To make this more confusing than it needed to be, I thought this was the perfect time to start using my real (first) name. No more @(tenthkrige), I'm @Sylvain now. Yes I'm french.
Now that that's taken care of, back to platitudes: I'm genuinely happy to be able to help around here. I always welcome criticisms of what I do or don't do (praise too!), and hope my small part in this weird endeavour will turn out positive for all involved. See you around or in the comments here.
@DanielFilan speaking for myself, because major powers seem (on average) a lot less belligerent now than they were over that period. I would for example be extremely surprised if EU countries declared war on each other in the next 30 years.
It seems to me that:
This should resolve negative right now. Absence of evidence is actually evidence of absence.
The resolution criteria clearly state "before 21 January 2021, Trump uses the pardon power", which does not require that we know about it, so if we at any point learn that he did, this will be re-resolved positive.
Sorry, I resolved to 45 rather than 45000000. Small difference, really. Fixed now.
To people who genuinely have a high credence: I find your position extremely optimistic, but ok.
To people who predicted high because in most scenarios that should resolve this negative, this doesn't resolve at all: Please consider what will be more important then. A few more MIPs might not matter all that much, but having helped correctly inform humanity on the dangers of the transition is its own reward.
By the way:
We | now | have ---|-----|----- markdown | tables | and I | think | we can | all | agree that | is | pretty cool | ! |
@aphlac my model of him says he would disapprove your preferential treatment.
@nicidob I'm sorry to hear you were mislead. This is a stock question that I think we will ask on many future elections. Do you have suggestions to make it less misleading the next time we run it?
As you point out, the markets and 538 are systemically biased in opposite directions. This is something we should take into account in our forecasts. It does makes this question a lot less interesting/informative, which is unfortunate.
P.S.: please use the mods/admins ping sparingly.
@Jgalt fwiw, I'd much prefer some official statement.