Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except in the case of citation.
No, citing who you copy doesn’t remove copyright protection.
Go look up "fair use" under copyright laws.
LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor
231–240 of 659 posts
Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely and people might be interested that in this case the prediction market for LK-99 is reacting in real time to new tweets from people trying to replicate. The “yes” spike to 32c yesterday was in response to a twitter account posting an image of a levitating grain in a tube. The credibility of that replication attempt was then evaluated by many and the market backed off afterwards. There is always a subtle an…
Prediction markets got Donald Trump wrong on the election night and Brexit too[0]. Given such a huge failure why should we care what they say? [0]: https://archive.li/7m8s6
Weren't they still much better than what many media experts were forecasting? Iirc, CNN put Clinton at 97%.
Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because markets aren't nearly as clever as is always claimed. Lehmann Brothers anyone?
More like governments aren’t as clever as claimed. The markets would have put all the bad actors out of business permanently and redistributed the resources (like shinny new buildings and engineers) to areas where they would better be utilized. Instead it was turned into an opportunity to launder money at planetary scale. This likely hints to why the truth about the benefits of brutally efficient free markets is dist…
That’s a pretty clever trick you got there. First you take all of the problems inherent to markets. And then you say “actually it’s the government’s job to fix that, and they’re doing a terrible job”—which you then turn around and use as a justification for more markets and less government!
Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don’t observe a frequent knee jerk like anti-markets reaction from comments across HN? What are good examples of their “disbenefits”?
Child labor. Slave trade. Sweatshops. 1000 different environmental catastrophes. You know, the reasons we have regulation. We had markets FIRST, then we got regulation on top of that, and we never looked back.
All of those things, including environmental catastrophes, existed for millennia before Adam Smith came along.
Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you heard the one about the Emperor of China's nose? https://imaginatorium.org/stuff/nose.htm Basically, making an average of a large number of estimates of an unknown value will (of course) fail if most/none of the estimators have any idea of the actual value being estimated.
I don't think I've seen that before. But the article you linked doesn't make the conclusion you suggest at all, instead they pose a corrected value. If indeed no one estimating had no information at all, the average length of Chinese person's nose would be close to that corrected value. It's the same with this topic. You won't get an answer to the question "Is this particular paper true or not?" but you'll get an ans…
It's not well explained in the version I linked (apologies, I should have looked for a clearer version).
The point of the story when I originally heard it is that no one has SEEN the Emperor's nose. So any statistical function (like averaging) of estimates is totally useless as they are all guesses.
No one has seen 'papers submitted under these circumstances' so no amount of 'crowd wisdom' will make any difference.
Also, as an aside the idea that 'the crowd will only answer the question they can answer' is ... bizarre. People will answer anything you ask them, and you have no way to know if they are just making it up.
Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely and people might be interested that in this case the prediction market for LK-99 is reacting in real time to new tweets from people trying to replicate. The “yes” spike to 32c yesterday was in response to a twitter account posting an image of a levitating grain in a tube. The credibility of that replication attempt was then evaluated by many and the market backed off afterwards. There is always a subtle an…
Prediction markets got Donald Trump wrong on the election night and Brexit too[0]. Given such a huge failure why should we care what they say? [0]: https://archive.li/7m8s6
Are you saying they are no better than chance? Or just that they are not 100% perfect?
Because we should deeply care about any source of information that beats chance, even if it is imperfect.
Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don’t observe a frequent knee jerk like anti-markets reaction from comments across HN? What are good examples of their “disbenefits”?
Child labor. Slave trade. Sweatshops. 1000 different environmental catastrophes. You know, the reasons we have regulation. We had markets FIRST, then we got regulation on top of that, and we never looked back.
Absolutely government’s fundamental role in human society is regulating against harm.
But somehow the narrative is markets are “bad”, they obviously aren’t as they seek out information and efficiency, which is a good thing. Markets are the one’s you should thank for telling you child labor, slaves, and sweatshops are a problem, and the environment issue, so you pressured your government to regulate those issues. Without free markets the alternative would be the government doing all those horrible things, which btw they certain used to.
People are mixed up, the primary problem is government failure to regulate and be transparent. It’s very difficult for governments to admit they create the problems so academics and politicians find the boggy man of markets.
Kennedy understands this topic well and while it’s unlikely he will win, I deeply hope he can somehow.
We need more markets for more things with clear and clean regulations build based on empirical evidence and scientific and not created by lobbyists involved in regulatory capture.
Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor
#238Saw some people hyping up markets where people are betting on prediction markets whether or not LK-99 will replicate. Can't help but feel like that money would be better spent just paying off some labs to actually try to replicate the process. The response I got from a predictions market enthusiast was that having a sufficiently large market would motivate people to attempt to have the process replicated and buy opti…
Note that real prediction markets with money are currently illegal in the US because of some legacy law. So Polymarket (currently the major prediction market I believe) is only usable outside the US anyway.
Currently the only US alternative is play money. Manifold and Metaculus use this system. Metaculus doesn't really use play "money", but a non-zero-sum system to award points for more accurate predictions. It's in both cases a game and an exercise in checking how well-calibrated your beliefs about the future are.
And here is the canonical FAQ on prediction markets, and the social/policy benefits they could have:
Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you heard the one about the Emperor of China's nose? https://imaginatorium.org/stuff/nose.htm Basically, making an average of a large number of estimates of an unknown value will (of course) fail if most/none of the estimators have any idea of the actual value being estimated.
> most/none of the estimators have any idea of the actual value being estimated. A subtle distinction is who is allowed to participate in a prediction market. "Everyone with $1" is a terrible answer, and produces the bad results people are pointing to. Financial markets avoid this because of their scale, where there's enough smart money to (usually) punish stupid money. Absent that scale, it's just stupid money muddl…
How would you construct such a knowledge barrier? Another prediction market?
Also, suggesting that there is such a thing as 'smart' money - presumably due to having more of it? - is amusing. As pointed out elsewhere in this discussion, there has been a lot of smart money acting particularly dumb over the last few years.
Re: LK-99: The live online race for a room-temperature superconductor
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
Child labor. Slave trade. Sweatshops. 1000 different environmental catastrophes. You know, the reasons we have regulation. We had markets FIRST, then we got regulation on top of that, and we never looked back.
All of those things, including environmental catastrophes, existed for millennia before Adam Smith came along.
So did markets.