The take that working on human lifespan extension is fascist is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard, but I wouldn't block someone just for espousing a position, I'd want to know why they believe that

@ShadowyZephyr Agreed, I would like to see what the other person wrote before I vote on this.

This one is great because the literal meaning I think is generally true, but the implication (that he is a viable candidate so keeping him off the debate is bad for democracy) is a different statement.

I don't love the after picture, but the before picture looks like an air conditioning vent.

idk how someone sharing their opinion on something as subjective as architectural style preference can be a bad take lol
the original was Brutalist, he likes the style, and it's been demolished for a new building (that seems to have taken 3 years longer than anticipated to build) so he misses it. people get nostalgic for things.

I agree with what's quoted here, but RFK is pretending that he's a viable candidate when he actually has no chance of winning.

@PlasmaBallin how do you feel (in a general, non-RFK sense) about the idea of third-party candidates who are on the ballot in multiple states participating in debates, even if they're not going to win? is the tweet a bad take because of the delusion of viability?

@PlasmaBallin Yeah, what makes this bad is "They are afraid I might win." They're not afraid RFK will win, they're afraid they'll lose to the other one because of him.

@shankypanky I don't have anything against third-party candidates participating in debates, and if RFK still has this much support getting closer to election day, he probably should be in the debates, since he's a big enough deal to affect the outcome. It's purely due to the delusion of viability that I think it's a bad take.

@PlasmaBallin lol

@shankypanky What are the criteria?

@TimothyJohnson5c16 per CNN

@shankypanky At first I thought this sounded unlikely, but he actually has two polls at 16% already that should count:

Marianne Williamson has a similar tweet that I didn't notice before submitting

I’d think this tweet were a lot better if he had said autistic people but no matter, Samantha would go out and connect with all kinds of other people on her own.

idk how to vote on this because The Bee has had several good jokes lately but I'm not sure why that's perplexing? tbh I often respect the wit and timeliness.

@shankypanky Beat you by ten seconds 😉

Why perplexed? Babylon Bee has always been pretty funny. Even Scott Alexander thought so, though I can't find the link at the moment.

I've been thinking about this one, and despite it resolving NO, I think it was actually a good take. There will be almost nothing that's positive sum on Manifold post-pivot, so a lot of users, maybe even the majority, will lose mana. And with the 10x mana devaluation, even existing users may run out of mana very quickly.

Pre-pivot, here is how things line up:

• Creating and trading on markets is positive sum

• Streaks, quests, and referrals are positive sum

• Leagues is positive sum

• Signing up for Manifold is positive sum

• Bounties are zero sum

• Loans are zero sum (though positive-sum in the short term)

• Subsidizing and boosts are negative sum

• Creating polls is negative sum

• Mana-chan is negative sum, and probably some other silly things I've forgotten about

Post-pivot:

• Creating and trading on markets is negative sum

• Streaks, quests, and referrals are positive sum

• Leagues is probably still positive sum, but reworked to be much less positive-sum than it was before

• Signing up for Manifold is positive sum (but 50x less so)

• Bounties don't exist

• Loans don't exist

• Subsidizing and boosts are negative sum

• Polls are even more negative sum

• Mana-chan is negative sum, or more negative-sum silly things may be added

I didn't include buying and donating mana there because whether they're positive/negative sum or zero sum depends on whether you're just considering mana or also considering real-world dollars.

But basically, it's worrying that the main thing you do on Manifold is now going to be negative sum, when it has always been positive sum before. I do think that the positive-sumness of trading on Manifold pre-pivot is a big thing that kept people on the site.

Also, the sign up bonus is now going to be only 200 I think, even though market creation will go up to 1000. So new users won't even have close to enough money to make a single market apparently? They can't even make a poll. I don't see how this economy will be sustainable, unless Manifold is hoping that it encourages a lot of people to buy mana (I suspect most will just leave instead).

@PlasmaBallin the 'negative sum' logic applies even more to real money sports betting and political betting, and there's 500x more volume in those than on manifold!

@jacksonpolack Those markets are different from Manifold, though. They're not social media sites that people sign up for for free and then get some fake currency to bet with. People are betting with money that they already have from sources outside the market. If Manifold's primary post-pivot user base is real-money bettors who buy most of their mana, then I guess the same thing is true here, but I'm kind of skeptical that that will be the case.

There are many things I'd have done differently about the pivot, as someone trying to balance keeping existing users happy and attracting new users.

But as a gamer, I confess I am personally a fan of increasing the difficulty level. Losing is fun!

Also, they're going to be giving away quite a lot of money in daily bonuses!

@PlasmaBallin If manifold isn't getting a lot of real money then the pivot is doomed anyway? The whole point of the pivot is that manifold as a site isn't getting enough eyeballs or making enough money right now.

And yeah, making it more difficult is good. The way I got to #2 leaderboard is really not the way you'd want to pick top forecasters, even though I like to think I'm good at it anyway.

@Joshua Daily bonuses are just being scaled up to match the new mana price, right? I guess maybe they'll be enough to offset the negative-sumness of markets?

@jacksonpolack

The way I got to #2 leaderboard is really not the way you'd want to pick top forecasters

sure, but surely the "New Leaderboard" won't be a very useful way to pick "top forecasters" either? good forecasting converts to profit only based on the volume of dumb (in a relative sense) money available to take. that isn't how i'd ever look for good forecasters.

in some hypothetical Aggregated Real Money Betting Leaderboard (across sites), every spot would be taken by sports bettors, because there are orders of magnitude more dumb money in sports betting than anything else.

@Ziddletwix It'd be much better if the dumb money was going into real things like politics, war, etc, because we'd compete to offer the best prices possible to them. That is not what I have done generally lol

@Ziddletwix also, fwiw, when you're being self-deprecating about your leaderboard climb IIUC you're partially referring to mira/barak blowing up their money with bad bets, right? if anything, that seems closer to what the new leaderboard will continue to reward? (the rewards for milking AMM subsidies is what will change, but "someone placed a very senseless bet and I took the other side" is exactly what will still be rewarded? and in the case of barak it was already real money? that's more speculative don't know the details but i'm curious about the example.)

@jacksonpolack

It'd be much better if the dumb money was going into real things like politics, war, etc, because we'd compete to offer the best prices possible to them

sure i guess it's an open question whether real money stakes will push more interest into serious topics. i'd be a bit surprised.

@Ziddletwix I'm refering to a whole bunch of different things. Barak's money would incentivize good forecasting more if it was put into liquid markets about politics than random markets about his bipolar. The Mirasplosion would've been 3x less impactful if manifold has put reasonable limits on loans.

@jacksonpolack Are you aware that I can read the patch notes and change my strategy months in advance if I suspect that people may soon become aware of me? The average Manifolder is not capable of making small modifications to the economics that constrain me. Their every thought is anticipated and planned for before they even think it.

Against superintelligent adversaries like myself, the only reasonable action when I enter the arena is to give up, crawl into one of my cages, and beg me to fix the problem for you. There's no point trying to think of a solution yourself.

@Mira aww, sorry i implied otherwise!