My baseline assumption for this is that everyone always does badly on these kinds of predictions. This frequently includes highly trained defense analysts with access to privileged information sources.
I don’t think this answers the question. 8% is an awfully strong prediction. Your meta-point is public info. People who honor your meta-point could make a killing in markets as badly miscalibrated as this one. That would make it profitable for people to correct the markets.
How can we expect well-calibrated markets on questions with so few events? It appears to me there is a ceiling on how good we can expect calibration to be here, and it is much lower than the average Metaculus question.
Of course, reflecting on this suggests to me we should be able to take a serious crack at the answer after this one, with more to follow afterward.
I don’t think this answers the question. 8% is an awfully strong prediction. Your meta-point is public info. People who honor your meta-point could make a killing in markets as badly miscalibrated as this one. That would make it profitable for people to correct the markets.
So the question stands:
WTF?
How can we expect well-calibrated markets on questions with so few events? It appears to me there is a ceiling on how good we can expect calibration to be here, and it is much lower than the average Metaculus question.
Of course, reflecting on this suggests to me we should be able to take a serious crack at the answer after this one, with more to follow afterward.