Posts

Super-forecasters as a service 2021-02-12T13:35:19.062Z
AR Glasses: Much more than you wanted to know 2021-01-16T00:31:29.689Z
The map and territory of NFT art 2020-12-29T11:45:34.960Z

Comments

Comment by frcassarino on In Defence of Spock · 2021-04-23T09:59:22.256Z · LW · GW

Qualia Research institute is working on building a catalogue of qualia iirc.

Comment by frcassarino on The best frequently don't rise to the top · 2021-03-25T12:39:29.212Z · LW · GW

His videos are clearly filmed with a phone, vertically, with no effort whatsoever in terms of production.Also he posted around 15 videos in the span of a couple of monhts, and never posted again. If you contrast that with cooking channels like Adam Ragusea, it's pretty clear why it didn't become as popular. 

Comment by frcassarino on Super-forecasters as a service · 2021-02-12T13:56:16.578Z · LW · GW

Yes. I would still use it though. For grand-scheme-of-things stuff, Metaculus is great.  For stuff that's personally relevant (What will be my income in 2025 if I switch to X career?) predictions from people with great track records is good enough for me.

Note that the title is super-forecasters as a service, not prediction-markets as a service.

Comment by frcassarino on Promoting Prediction Markets With Meaningless Internet-Point Badges · 2021-02-12T13:24:31.808Z · LW · GW

I've just started building a website yesterday, that I think would be super interesting, but I'm not sure if it's legal or if Metaculus/Elicit would be fine with it.

The idea: Super-forecasters as a Service. 

Say I wanted to know if I should book a flight to Costa Rica this summer, but I'm hesitant because of Covid flight restriction uncertainty. I could create a question using Elicit, "Will commercial flight BA2490 from the UK to Costa Rica in July 24 be cancelled?" 

The website would let you embed your elicit question, and pay people for predicting. People get paid based on their Points-per-question in Metaculus (https://metaculusextras.com/points_per_question?page=1). You can "auction" 100 dollars on a question, and pick a base price per prediction multiplied by the Points-per-question metric. 

Benefits:
-It would give all of us access to predictions from the top forecasters in Metaculus. 
-It would incentivize people to become better predictors in Metaculus, so they can get paid more per prediction in my website.

Drawbacks:
-It could encourage more people to game Metaculus.
-It would not be as efficient as a straight prediction market, as people have no incentive to make an effort to make good predictions in this website, as there's no scoring. They are incentivized to make as many predictions as possible to make more money. 

Questions:
-I'm I right to assume that this would be legal, as I'm paying people a fixed fee per prediction (based on their Metaculus score), rather than paying based on correctly predicting the question?
-Would Metaculus be fine with this idea? Would they be fine with me scraping https://metaculusextras.com/points_per_question?page=1 and using that data to determine the score for each person? 

-Would Elicit be fine with this idea? Would they be willing to give me access to their API, or a way to embed questions directly on my Website?

 

Comment by frcassarino on AR Glasses: Much more than you wanted to know · 2021-01-16T03:39:57.522Z · LW · GW

I loved the notation you used to distill the feedback loop idea. I'll add it to the post, if you don't mind.

Comment by frcassarino on What trade should we make if we're all getting the new COVID strain? · 2020-12-30T13:08:30.738Z · LW · GW

I asked, thanks for the tips!

Comment by frcassarino on The map and territory of NFT art · 2020-12-29T17:48:55.656Z · LW · GW

Great reply. I share your beliefs on consciousness copying, and would have the same concerns.

As a continuity believer, I think that the original Mona Lisa objectively is more valuable and that only something which destroyed the information of which one that is could possibly render it fungible with a copy - for the same reason I believe that my own continuity of consciousness is an absolutely necessary prerequisite for a being to be defined as "me", and that a perfect copy of me would be another person entirely who just happens to resemble me. The only way you could get me to consider the copy equivalent to myself, is if you erase from existence (or at least from the knowledge I can ever hope to personally access) any evidence of which is which.

I do grant that in some sense there are features of some territory which we could name originality. There's complicated boundary questions, as we've both outlined.

 It's not obvious to me why the Mona Lisa would be objectively more valuable; even if it were objectively original, it doesn't follow that the fact that it's original makes it more valuable.
Even if there's a good argument for why it's objectively more valuable, my broader point is that the reason why it's more valuable in practice is because people have maps that say that originals are more valuable than copies.

Whether that's true or not objectively doesn't change that. And those maps were originally brought on because as a heuristic, getting an original X usually brings more utility in many ways than getting a copy. But we are so used to those maps, that even NFT paintings are enough to trigger them, even though there's no conceivable advantage of owning the original. Actually, the sole advantage is that because we are so used to applying the map that rewards us for owning originals, we will in fact gain utility/pleasure just from knowing that it's an original NFT. Very meta.

Comment by frcassarino on The map and territory of NFT art · 2020-12-29T17:31:54.724Z · LW · GW

Unless you value having the original. Imagine a private collector and the head of an art gallery, both happy they have the Mona Lisa. And only the thief who promised the private collector they'd switch it out for a forgery knows which is the forgery, and which, is the original.


Indeed. That maps well to the idea that we value "originals" more for the sake of them being originals, even if they don't provide any additional utility to us compared to copies besides that fact.
 

Comment by frcassarino on What trade should we make if we're all getting the new COVID strain? · 2020-12-26T14:14:52.145Z · LW · GW
  1. Which ones?
Comment by frcassarino on Covid 12/24: We’re F***ed, It’s Over · 2020-12-25T19:05:48.611Z · LW · GW

It's a great point. So is your guess that the fact that the new strain originated on the exact country where we do most of the checking for new strains just a coincidence? And not some form of survivorship bias?

Comment by frcassarino on Covid 12/24: We’re F***ed, It’s Over · 2020-12-25T16:24:00.819Z · LW · GW

Question for Zvi:

I might be coping here. What do you make of the fact that the UK does most of the checking for new Covid strains? https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EqCPxtmXcAAUdzt?format=jpg&name=small

Isn't it weird that the new more infectious Covid strain that will take over the world just so happens to originate in the only place where we are checking for Covid strains?

Some possibilities:
- It didn't originate in the UK. It's already widespread in many countries, and the UK just happened to detect it.
- There's actually a bunch of more infectious strains all over the place, but they just haven't been detected. The higher infectiousness has already been impacting the covid case numbers for a while.
 

Comment by frcassarino on What trade should we make if we're all getting the new COVID strain? · 2020-12-25T15:48:42.725Z · LW · GW

Jacobian, I'd be very interested to hear what conclusion you come to.