orthonormal comments on Histocracy: Open, Effective Group Decision-Making With Weighted Voting - Less Wrong

14 Post author: HonoreDB 17 January 2012 10:35PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (62)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: orthonormal 18 January 2012 03:49:52AM 5 points [-]

I've personally bought Sarah-Palin-To-Withdraw-As-VP-Candidate stock I thought was overvalued because I knew it was about to rise even further.

Funny thing, I'll bet somebody else did the exact same thing just before the price crashed. The fact that you made money in that instance doesn't prove that it was a sane decision.

(I do agree that Intrade suffers from market failures of various kind, but many of them are caused by high barriers to liquidity- like the fact that you couldn't make all that much money by shorting a fringe candidate's chances, even if that candidate's supporters were irrationally buying a 1% chance up to 5%.)

Comment author: HonoreDB 18 January 2012 04:29:25AM 0 points [-]

But that sort of thing is sometimes going to be a sane decision, if you're sufficiently confident you understand the market (in this case, I wasn't trading on momentum, it was just that she made a major gaffe and the market hadn't responded yet). In an ideal system, misrepresenting your beliefs should never be rewarded with increased voting power. It's not an anecdote, it's an existence proof.

I'm being kind of glib because I haven't really read my Hanson on this.