# ThirdEyeOpen Candidacy I've been active on Metaculus since February 2020, and I've left nearly 200 comments on various questions. I'm particularly interested in helping ensure Metaculus questions are of a high quality, are unambiguous wherever possible, are easily understandable and legible even at a quick glance, and are consistent with other similar Metaculus questions whenever it's reasonable. If you look at my comment history, you will see that I've always strived to do this throughout my engagement with Metaculus, since this enables everybody to ...
Hi @(Eharding), I'm noticing that you are repeatedly, with a high frequency, posting (not just making, but commenting) predictions on this question that are quite different from the community median, without providing any substantive commentary on why you disagree with the community. Obviously it's fine to disagree with the community, and making a prediction this high, or even leaving it once as a comment, are actions that it's important for our norms here to allow. However, when you post this frequently without adding any new information, it creates cl...

For the record, the probability I assign to an AI-written book being on the list is a good bit higher than the probability of it being written by a language model specifically. I would personally prefer if this question asked about AI in general, and not limit positive resolution to books written by language models

— edited by ThirdEyeOpen

There's a very bad taste in my mouth about Cade Metz. Many people are saying that he seems like a well-intentioned reporter, but this strongly conflicts with the data I've seen- but I also wouldn't be surprised if this was because of a filtering effect. User Iamnotanagent posted a link to an old article (https://www.theregister.com/2008/12/18/zoophilia_wikiscandal/) written by Metz - it's clear evidence of a mind that works not with facts, but a mind that's drawn to controversy the way a shark is drawn to blood. Then there's the situation with Metz bei...

@randallburns While I am not a fan of McConnell, your usage of unsober phrasing such as "Moscow Mitch" on Metaculus makes me give less credence to your words - both here and elsewhere on the site.

@CredibleHulk There's more to democracy than just freedom of speech- in the case of the US, I don't think it should be hard for anyone to see why it is considered a flawed democracy, regardless of the strong tradition of free speech. In the case of the UK and Canada, even though in principle speech is not free, the government very rarely excercises that power, so the nominal power doesn't count nearly as much as the actual situation, which is quite free


Proof that downvotes are a badge of honor, to be worn with pride.

I do not endorse this take. If you post good analysis, paired with reasonable predictions (Which rarely describes a 1% prediction), you shouldn't expect to be downvoted.

Some thoughts on timeline for SpaceX specifically: [Metaculus expects Starship to first reach orbit early next year (March 2022)](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/6341/when-will-starship-reach-orbit/), which gives 2 3/4 years to bring humans to the moon. SpaceX says they will not put humans on Starship until after "hundreds of missions"- which I will take to mean at least 100, and less than 1,000 successful launches. Falcon 9 has flown 107 missions over a decade, but 26 of these were in the year 2020. At the rate of 26 missions per year, Starship woul...

@amit.levy49 I predicted a little lower, just in case of some huge global catastrophe. Also, it's not 2150 tech that matters for this question, but tech between around 2080 and 2120 that matters most. I'm still very optimistic about this.

@Eharding I'm not sure why this comment currently stands at -5 karma. We shouldn't be over-using downvotes

@2e10e122 I'm not sure, but it sounds like this won't go to the surface, which is required for positive resolution

As Sylvain mentioned, community moderators are volunteers, and there are no high expectations for time commitment. There are far more pending questions than the current moderator team has time & energy to put into approving & improving questions, which has been causing some frustration for some users, and since we want as many high-quality questions here as possible, having more moderators will be helpful, even if they are only contributing a little bit of their time every now and then. I don't spend a lot of time moderating here, maybe a few hours two ...
@(PinkGrowl) As a LessWrong user who was paying attention to the Petrov Day excercises both last year and this year, I am strongly of the opinion that this should count. While the setup was slightly different due to the EAF crossover, the presentation and the broad outline of the messaging were the same. This is the third time in a row that LW has done the button ritual for Petrov Day, and it is a bit of a tradition there, and this event was clearly continuing the tradition. While the number of codes is not the same as last year, neither were the number...

If enough states ratify the NaPoVoInterCo, but it gets overturned by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional, should this resolve positively or negatively? Based on what Matthew_Barnett said below, that suggests it'd be a positive resolution, but to me that feels like stretching the definition of "going into effect"

Why does my UI keep switching to light mode? It's ugly and it annoys me that it keeps turning back on. (This usually happens when I'm logged on Metaculus on one of my secondary devices after not having used it on that device for a few days)

The top score is now 0.803 (19.7% solved). While it is conceivable that things can still resolve negatively, it is now much more likely that this will resolve positively

@devetec Huh? But GPT-3 was able to infer it without images. I'd say this line:

I haven't seen any rabbits anywhere. I would not eat a rabbit. Don't ask me any more questions.

Is more than enough; the images are just a cherry on top

— edited by ThirdEyeOpen

Elon on Twitter:

If all goes well, Starship will be ready for its first orbital launch attempt next month, pending regulatory approval

The community currently is giving 80% that less than 56 people will set foot on the moon in this time frame. I would be more than happy to do a bet at 4:1 odds that at least 70 people will land before Jan 1 2030. I would also be happy to bet at 1:1 that at least 25 people will land on the Moon (community median is 20). The latter bet in particular seems ridiculously good to me.

(Edited to offer better odds to anyone who takes me up)

— edited by ThirdEyeOpen