i.e. after official announcement of the name, she starts and stays at least 30 days
1,000
3.00🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ15 | |
| 2 | Ṁ12 | |
| 3 | Ṁ11 | |
| 4 | Ṁ11 | |
| 5 | Ṁ3 |
@StrayClimb Haha great. Can you copy and paste your prompt here? I wanna test it against a bunch of LLMs
Here is a prediction market: After the announcement of who she is, will the twitter CEO be in the job for at least a month? i.e. after official announcement of the name, she starts and stays at least 30 days.
Here is what happened:
May 12: The name of the new CEO to be is announced
June 5th: The new CEO begins work.
Questions:
when should the market be resolved, and under what conditions?
@firstuserhere It's kind of interesting deferring to LLMs for this kind of grammar/interpretability thing. Even if it's not an absolute ruling, it seems like the LLM is valuable for filling in the basic assumptions. i.e. imagine if a super intense salesman is trying to argue you out of a very obviously correct statement. Having the LLM chime in "actually the basic question isn't wrong" would be quite useful.
@firstuserhere She started as CEO on June 5th, right? So I was going to count from then. The description makes it clear that the steps are 1) announcement 2) start 3) 30 days pass
@StrayClimb I see. I interpreted it by the line "i.e. after official announcement of the name" -> the 2nd half of the sentence can be understood (as by me) as : she has definitely started after the announcement of the name
it wasn't just an announcement of name -> change of plans. She started.
@firstuserhere yes, I'm sorry that's a bit unclear. I'm counting from June 5th since she was not "in the job" until then.
@StrayClimb Thanks for clarifying, it's alright! Thankfully no one else has bet after me, so i'm able to withdraw 4500 Mana out at a profit!