You can do calibration and accuracy. You can start with predictions of arbitrary granularity and then force them into whatever boxes you want.
For calibration, it isn't very useful to score events at 50%. Instead of making boxes of 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 95, 99%, you should instead do something like 55, 70, 80, 90, 95, 99%. Taking an event that you "really" think is 50/50 and forcing yourself to choose a side to make it 45/55 is no worse than taking an event that you think is 45/55 and forcing it to be either 50 or 60%.
Also, the jump from 95 to 99 is pretty big. Better to add an intermediate category of 97 or 98. Or just replace 99 with 98.
I think 60, 80, 90, 95, 98 would be a good set of bins for beginners.
For calibration, it isn't very useful to score events at 50%
Why?
TL;DR: Prediction & calibration parties are an exciting way for your EA/rationality/LessWrong group to practice rationality skills and celebrate the new year.
On December 30th, Seattle Rationality had a prediction party. Around 15 people showed up, brought snacks, brewed coffee, and spent several hours making predictions for 2017, and generating confidence levels for those predictions.
This was heavily inspired by Scott Alexander’s yearly predictions. (2014 results, 2015 results, 2016 predictions.) Our move was to turn this into a communal activity, with a few alterations to meet our needs and make it work better in a group.
Procedure:
To make this work in a group, we recommend the following:
This makes a good activity for rationality/EA groups for the following reasons:
Some examples of the predictions people used:
Also relevant: