What are the top frictions preventing wider adoption of forecasting best practices?

Standard

Ṁ15k

resolved Jun 14

ALL

11%11%

Good questions require a lot of back and forth

10%10%

Hard to put as part of an org

10%10%

People don’t know about forecasting

8%8%

The average person does not think in probabilities

8%8%

People don’t want to share private information

7%7%

Lack of awareness

7%7%

not enough liquidity/dumb money to make it worthwhile for good forecasters

5%5%Other

5%5%

Existing solutions have poor UX

5%5%

Forecasts are hard to interpret without rationales

5%5%

Whalebait

5%5%

Sub-optimal market design and/or resolution criteria

3%3%

Questions aren’t relevant enough to what I care about

2%2%

Conditional forecasts are more useful but less frequent

2%2%

Forecasting disrupts existing hierarchies

2%1.6%

People don’t think forecasting is accurate

1%1.1%

There are alternatives with higher ROI

1%1.1%

Making good forecasts is hard

1%1.1%

People don’t know how forecasts should affect their decisions

1%1.0%

Operationalizing questions is hard

Imagine 2 different worlds:

We reduce all the frictions listed here by p%
We reduce friction X by p%

The price of X should be the ratio of adoption in world (b) / adoption in world (a).

Resolution

This is a self-resolving market. I’ll resolve all options to PROB at some random time the week after Manifest.

NB: This market is part of a live session at Manifest 2024. If you are/were not at the session, you’re probably missing some important context. I’ll link to the session video once it’s up, but it’s likely I’ll have resolved the market by then.

#Manifest 2024

#Meta-Forecasting

Get

1,000

and

1.00

4 Comments

Sort by:

I think what markets need are awareness and respect by the masses. Money wise, they're negative sum after the market platform takes their share and when you account for opportunity cost of having your money locked up for a year before an event resolves.

But as a society, we could "pay" people with respect, which isn't necessarily negative sum. We shouldn't pay attention for a second to any TV pundit who gives an opinion on how a war is going or who'll win an election if that pundit isn't willing to put their money where their mouth is. And inversely, anyone who is willing to put a significant amount of their own money on the line should get some extra respect, especially those who consistently make money on the markets.

We don't just need to advertise markets as a cool thing people should use. We need to advertise the people that are good at markets, and make those individuals into cool celebrities.

bought Ṁ30 Other YES

I think this is a very concerning market/resolution mechanism lol. the incentives are very wrong

@Bayesian I'm tempted to add a "whalebait" option.

@BrunoParga I just added "Sub-optimal market design and/or resolution criteria", which I think is a more general umbrella for "whalebait" and similar issues.

Related questions

Related questions