= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
philh comments on Open Thread, April 27-May 4, 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (200)
Unfortunately, this would be easy to abuse online. Create a sockpuppet account, make a stupid prediction, and then quickly fix the prediction using your real account. This is equivalent to moving bits from one account to the other.
At CFAR workshop all participants were real people. But they still missed an existing opportunity to abuse the system: there were rewards for winning, but no punishment for losing. So two people could agree to transfer a lot of bits from one to another, and split the price afterwards.
Maybe a system more difficult to abuse can be designed, but a direct copy of algorithm used at CFAR isn't it.
I raised this possibility, but an instructor said they'd use human judgment to stop us from doing that.
(My actual idea was along the lines of "if two of us decide that we aren't going to come to agreement on a market, we can just repeatedly alternate our bets, and each expect that we're getting arbitrarily many points from this". The instructor said something like, they'd just ignore all but the final bets if they thought we were doing that.)