= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
shokwave comments on New Year's Predictions Thread (2011) - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (224)
Massively underconfident. I downvoted for self-consciousness, then I reconsidered and upvoted for the irony. But then I downvoted because I felt you were attempting to get upvotes, then I revised and upvoted for being explicit in that attempt. Then, later, I downvoted for being explicit about your explicitness.
Basically, you should have expected high 90s for all of those events. As it stands, your percentages would require you to offer even-money bets for any of those events except regretting, all of which you'd lose.
Lower confidence was to account for the fact that some people would read it and decline from voting either way; therefore P>50% of upvote would not imply P<50% of downvote. In hindsight it's a confusing scheme to parse into bets. Everyone who read (e.g.) the first prediction and didn't vote would count in the 80% who didn't downvote it for being self-conscious. The first five percentages were, in my mind, predictions concerning the distribution of the actions of those who read the comment, where 'didn't vote' also counts toward the union. But regarding betting, there's no way to get the data of how many actually read it.