Yea, the Cochrane meta-study aggregates a bunch of heterogenous studies so the aggregated results are confusing to analyze. The unfortunate reality is that it is complicated to get a complete picture—one may have to look at the individual studies one by one if they truly want to come to a complete understanding of the lit.
edge_retainer
Karma: 17
Betting against republicans and third parties on poly is a sound strategy, pretty clear they are marketing heavily towards republicans and the site has a crypto/republican bias. For anything controversial/political, if there is enough liq on manifold I generally trust it more (which sounds insane because fake money and all).
That being said, I don’t like the way Polymarket is run (posting the word r*tard over and over on Twitter, allowing racism in comments + discord, rugging one side on disputed outcomes, fake decentralization), so I would strongly consider not putting your money on PM and instead supporting other prediction markets, despite the possible high EV.
As a trust fund baby who likes to think I care about the future of humanity, I can confidently say that I would at least consider it, though I’d probably take the money.
Is anyone else shocked that no one before Daniel refused to sign?
Someone who left on bad terms and was incredibly pissed at open ai
Interested in AI but has low marginal utility of money (academic, trust-fun baby, otherwise already rich)
Ethical grounds
I guess I shouldn’t be coming to this conclusion in 2024 but holy cow are people greedy.
its a public externality, you don’t need a government division to run bathrooms, you just need to do 1. + provide a subsidy