@(emejec) I think you may be completely misunderstanding what Metaculus is for. It is not a place for sharing opinions on whether Mr Trump is doing a good or bad job as president, or on whether he deserves a Nobel peace prize or a long stay in prison or something in between. It is a place for making _specific predictions_ about what is going to happen, with what probability. Sometimes bad presidents get reelected. Sometimes good ones don't. Metaculus is not interested in your opinion, or mine, about whether Mr Trump deserves a second term. Only in whet...
@(Sylvain) _Three_? If only. It's the dozens of comments here that say things like "It would be cool to go to Mars, therefore SpaceX will land people on Mars by 2025" or "I don't like Elon Musk, therefore SpaceX will not land people on Mars by 2025" or "It's just obvious that SpaceX will land people on Mars by 2025". Of course expressing annoyance about the endless stream of drivel doesn't do anything to stop it -- I assume most of these are drive-by commenters who will never read anything here, and for that matter they show little sign of ever having r...

@gristedes, I think you may be confused about the purpose of this site, which is to predict, not to make moral evaluations. Asking the question (or indeed predicting a high probability of positive resolution) doesn't mean wanting a future in which the question resolves positively. Expatiating angrily on how veganism is unnatural and immoral does nothing to help figure out whether some country will ever make it law. (There is no shortage of unnatural and immoral things that countries have made law, after all.)

* A female pope * US (or world) GDP doubling or halving * One or more states seceding from the USA * Bankruptcy of some super-secure-looking company (Google, Walmart, Samsung, BP, ...) * Contact with an alien civilization * Supervolcano eruption * \>= 10% of world energy production from nuclear fusion * Dalai Lama appointed to senior role in Chinese government * New presidential face on Mount Rushmore * Black hole discovered somewhere close enough to send a spacecraft to it * A year-long interval in which no two nations are at war * Major democratic nati...
EITHER a change to how scoring works on early resolution, so that points are awarded as if the question had resolved at its nominal resolution time; OR an entry in the FAQ explaining exactly why the way it currently works is better, and preferably some system that automatically puts in a link to that FAQ entry when a question is resolved early. (It seems like every time a question resolves early some people get surprised and upset at losing a lot of points they were expecting to get; I can't now remember whether there is any good reason for the count...
I use it 1. For fun: it gives me interesting things to think about. 2. To improve my skills in prediction and calibration. 3. For the satisfaction of seeing my Meaningless Internet Points increase. My guess is that these are the main motivations (perhaps with quite different weightings) for most active Metaculus users. (I exclude the idiots who turn up on every question having to do with, for instance, Elon Musk or Donald Trump, to go ra-ra-ra for or against their favourite divisive figure, who generally don't understand the distinction between predi...

@Jgalt I'm not sure there's much value in attempting to have a serious rational discussion with someone who thinks "human genes are degrading (social justice, equality)" is a coherent, never mind plausible, claim.

I note that it still hasn't been clarified whether these people have to get to Mars alive for positive resolution. That seems possibly important.

@mbuffle2023 70 years ago was 2019-70 = 1949. The Apollo manned moon landings were 1969-1972. I know some people believe that the moon landings were a hoax, but I haven't heard that any of those people believe that we did land humans on a celestial object 20 years before them...

@frxtz Strongly agree. Also, @TZubiri, if you are confident you understand this stuff much better than jabowery does then you should be able to (1) strengthen your case and (2) help everyone else understand better, by being specific about some things you think are wrong about this question and why.

@Jgalt I'm not sure it's worth responding to comments like theoubass's, which completely fails to understand what Metaculus is about and attempts to use it as a platform for political cheerleading.

@notany The odd thing is that this doesn't happen in most Metaculus questions' comments -- but maybe we should see it as a foretaste of what will happen everywhere if Metaculus becomes much more popular.

(Though I suspect most of Metaculus is just fundamentally not very interesting to the sort of person most inclined to leave that kind of comment.)

More linkage between related questions. This isn't necessarily a Metaculus feature, as such; question authors can always include links to other questions related to theirs. But Metaculus could provide * a dedicated place for putting links to related questions * automatic bidirectional linking (so that e.g. if a new question links to an old one, the old one automatically gets a link to the new one) * something like Stack Overflow's feature where when you start writing a question you get an automatic list of already-existing questions that seem like they...
The resolution criterion requires a bunch of medical experts to declare that the patient is conscious. It seems to me that in the best case, that wouldn't happen because no one would think it necessary. You put your newly defrosted arguably-not-exactly-corpses in the newly developed miracle medical machine, press the big red button, and ten minutes later they walk out in obvious good health. Done. You would certainly have medics examine them, but they wouldn't be asking or answering the question "was the patient conscious and alert for 24 hours?". For t...
Many questions are of the form "will X happen by date Y?", where Y is often a long way in the future when the question is asked. I believe the following is a common experience; it certainly is for me: * You see the question, make a plausible guess at how often X happens, and make an appropriate prediction. * You then completely forget about the question until either ... * ... date Y arrives and the thing hasn't happened and you lose a pile of Meaningless Internet Points, or ... * ... date Y approaches and someone happens to comment on the questi...

@bzial I estimated a low probability precisely because of the $10B condition. I am quite upset if this resolves positively while ignoring that condition.

Is it possible for the answer to the question to become known before the current closing date? If so, have you specified clearly and unambiguously what should happen then, and thought carefully about whether it's appropriate?

@(Uncle Jeff) You can make anything a "religion" by using religious terminology to describe it. Pick your least favourite political party: of course it's a "religion"! Its leader is the pope, its rallies and congresses are religious celebrations, its policies are sacraments, disagreement with it is heresy, etc. Except that of course this is nonsense. Words mean things, and "worship" means more than "respect" or "care about", "divine" means more than "important", "cathedrals" means more than "places held to be important", "prophet" means more than "perso...

It would be nice to have clarification on what happens if Travis remains at number 1 all the way to this question's resolution date. Presumably either the question resolves ambiguous ("there was no such date") or else it's treated as "> Aug 7, 2030" ("it certainly isn't any sooner").

I would favour the latter, except that I don't understand why the resolution date is half a year before the latest possible answer; I think the two should match (preferably by moving the resolution date, since by design there's a 10-year window).

@Jgalt On the upside, it's definitely a related question.