@Jotto I am confident at 1% on this question, and would go lower if metaculus supported it. I am a little less confident on the sister question about landing anything on Mars. [1] There I am at 4%, greatly down from the question opening based on Musk dropping the original Red Dragon plan and no new details being forthcoming.
@Linch I think we are at 4 out of 100 senators who have had a positive COVID test. You really think Trump's risk ratio is over 10 times as high as a typical senator? My take on this is the metaculus prediction was better than the community prediction, and it is basically chance that the resolution is positive despite the low prior odds of the event.
OpenAI has a new paper out on their Dota agent. See https://cdn.openai.com/dota-2.pdf. It reports compute usage of 770 Petaflops/s-days which I calculate as 6.6e22 Flops. So about a factor of 10 below positive resolution.
Some names sorted by birth year, divided by generations:
1941 : Bernie Sanders
1942 : Joe Biden
<hr>1947 : Hillary Clinton
1949 : Elizabeth Warren
1952 : Sherrod Brown
1954 : Oprah Winfrey
1956 : Deval Patrick
1957 : Andrew Cuomo
1957 : Terry McAuliffe
1964 : Kamala Harris
<hr>1966 : Kirsten Gillibrand
1969 : Cory Booker
1973 : Chris Murphy
— edited by traviswfisher
Note the resolution condition here is based on JHU or WHO data, both of which are baaed on confirmed cases by testing. But the US has been unable to scale up testing and is now giving up on doing so [1]. Other countries are also unlikely to keep testing up in the kind of mass infection scenario that would give a posotove resolution. There is a significant likelihood the disease is this deadly but this question still resolves negative.
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/03…
— edited by traviswfisher
The deep mind team is sitting on hardware that can train alphagozero in 3 days. Presumably they will find SOMETHING to do with that hardware over the rest of this year.
The bigger question is, not will it be done, but will it be published?
The Olympic Committee is saying the go/no-go decision date will be towards the end of May.
This resolves positive: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2018/upd….
@Jgalt From what I am seeing I am afraid that the right target is estimated percent of world population infected. If the latest estimate of R0 ~ 2.5 is at all close to reality, this one is headed to full pandemic territory.
Related, unforthnately probably short-term question: will WHO declare this to be a pandemic?
<1% for either to have a permanent population by 2100, much less of thousands. It's silly to speculate between two not-gonna-happens.
@notany I'm not sure if I'm off the hype rail or not. After some intensive self-deliberation I am at 93% on this question currently, down from 99% prior to the emergence of this virus.
Is it required that the language about "reduced neutralization by convalescent and post-vaccination sera" be posted on the CDC site?
Here for instance is a preprint saying "Highlights: Original strain convalescent and vaccine sera show reduced B.1.1.7 neutralization": https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article…
For what its worth, Boston's ban passed Wednesday, June 24 so I think that one should be the reference for question close date. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.wbur.org/new…
For what its worth, I put a prediction of 74% on January 22 and didn't update it. I agree that it could have gone higher by question close time. The metaculus prediction skews lower than the average prediction, probably incorrectly in this case, but statistically we humans are proven to be over-optimistic in predicting.
@dan I think this resolved too early. NYC has done a data update; now every day before May 6 shows over 200 hospitalizations.