The concept of a large modern-day institution that fails to exist strikes me as bizarre and incoherent. Is the idea a large institution that could exist if we were somehow able to twiddle causal factor X Judea-Pearl-style? (If so, it immediately poses the question of what causal factor X is for any specific proposed non-existent institution.)
I’m not really following your comment. When Robin advocates large prediction markets on all sorts of topics, or specifically markets on CEOs & whether they should resign, is he saying bizarre incoherent nonsense?
Unfortunately, I’m not familiar with Pearl; would a Pearl-style explanation be ‘if a wealthy influential person believes my writings about prediction markets and creates something that meets my specifications, the results will be good (with high probability)’?
I think it’s simply a choice of phrasing that happened to cause an incongruous mental image for me; hence my attempt to work it around to a description I could encompass. I think of “to fail” as an active verb—futarchy doesn’t exist because we fail to enact it. In my brain, something that doesn’t exist can’t do anything, including fail to exist. As for the Pearl reference, I think I’ll just point you to the source.
The concept of a large modern-day institution that fails to exist strikes me as bizarre and incoherent. Is the idea a large institution that could exist if we were somehow able to twiddle causal factor X Judea-Pearl-style? (If so, it immediately poses the question of what causal factor X is for any specific proposed non-existent institution.)
I’m not really following your comment. When Robin advocates large prediction markets on all sorts of topics, or specifically markets on CEOs & whether they should resign, is he saying bizarre incoherent nonsense?
Unfortunately, I’m not familiar with Pearl; would a Pearl-style explanation be ‘if a wealthy influential person believes my writings about prediction markets and creates something that meets my specifications, the results will be good (with high probability)’?
I think it’s simply a choice of phrasing that happened to cause an incongruous mental image for me; hence my attempt to work it around to a description I could encompass. I think of “to fail” as an active verb—futarchy doesn’t exist because we fail to enact it. In my brain, something that doesn’t exist can’t do anything, including fail to exist. As for the Pearl reference, I think I’ll just point you to the source.