This market is part of Manifold's 2023 Predictions, a group of forecasts about what's in store for Manifold this year. Markets will be resolved by the Manifold core team.
Close date updated to 2023-07-01 11:59 pm
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ1,030 | |
| 2 | Ṁ672 | |
| 3 | Ṁ586 | |
| 4 | Ṁ505 | |
| 5 | Ṁ476 |
People are also trading
@DanMan314 yeah for whatever reason whoever made it decided to close it halfway through the year but have it only resolved based on the entire year. If you scroll down the comments you can see the full context
@DavidChee most people seem to have bet based on close date. See Nate silver at 0% + typical end of market betting activity at the end of July.
N/A?
@jgyou I did keep Musk/Buterin shares because of EOY resolution, but now I'm wondering why I didn't buy more Nate Silver 🤔
@DanMan314 unfortunately others traded with the assumption of an end of year resolution (as described in the comments). To be consistent with it and similar markets in the past we will be going with the clarified resolution in the comments.
Sorry :(
Hopefully next time certain people (founder of a particular company) make sure to edit the description 😫
@DavidChee I read the comments, and it seems like people assumed it would resolve at the end of the year, and the close date was here to avoid some problem with the old multichoice market system
https://manifold.markets/Manifold/who-will-be-the-most-twitterfollowe#sePYunGIY25bObbUtefl
@dionisos oh I missed those comments at the bottom.
I guess I'll unresolve it and just keep it closed until the end of the year...
@MarcusAbramovitch It closes halfway through the year and resolves at the end. So it needs to wait 5 months.
@Feanor I think this market tracks @MichaelWheatley's position, not the admins position on the matter. I could imagine admins not having any doubt that @LexFridman is real Lex Fridman and resolving this market before Michael resolves his market.
@MayMeta Hold on, I thought the market would only resolve by EOY. Closing earlier was meant only to circumvent the market format limitations, avoiding people betting on the winner after they had made the market
@LexFridman No worries, Lex! This happens all the time and the answer will eventually be hidden as people sell out of the option. No admin action needed.
@ian Plus it’s making for some really interesting meta-commentary on “what even are prediction markets about” in the comments, imo 😂
@higherLEVELING I'm pretty sure that on Manifold there's an unspoken rule that only the first entry is valid out of several duplicating ones in Free response markets.
@MayMeta -_-... but it's the real one tho.. and it actually has his picture on that option. thanks for pointing it out tho, i didnt know about this secret law
@higherLEVELING Being posted by the “Lex” account doesn’t make the response a more “real” answer of “Lex”. In addition to being second (which is the important part) It’s actually a worse answer because the text doesn’t answer the question.
@higherLEVELING is this a shameless grab for a higher-upside betting opportunity or what? 😆 guess my precognitive deduction skill (aka luck) isn’t worth anything to ya?
@JimHays no. it does actually make the response more 'real'. If you were to take poll and show anyone who has seen a lex fridman video or has seen an image, or has some idea who lex is, they would choose the answer that i've indicated here.
The lex that i've circled is more 'real' and actually makes way more sense to chose it over all the other answers. When you're looking at the poll, clearly you're ignoring what's right infront of you.
If you take a look at the poll and read the text for each of the choices. Now look to the left of the text. Look at the portrait that accompanies the text. Now, looking at both the text and the portrait, if you were told to choose the 'real' lex, does the first choice look like the correct one? I would describe the first choice as a fake or phoney lex fridman.
the 'real' lex is the one that i indicated earlier.
Now, I admit, there was a moment where the first answer. it was the correct one. But that was only until the 'real' lex showed up and the first answer was no longer correct to choose.
@MattCWilson feel free to read the above and let me know if you are able to see it the way that i'm seeing it. I can understand if you're irk'd about my comment about the 'real' lex, but hopefully you can see what i'm seeing. If you need clarification, just let me know.
@higherLEVELING I mean, you wrote English words, and I recognize each one…
I feel like your argument translates to: if a sports pundit says “Lebron James will be MVP this year”, and then months later, towards the end of the season, Lebron says “I believe I’ll be MVP this year, and here’s a link to some evidence”, you would totally ignore / discount any predictive power or market value to the pundit.
Am I wrong?
@MattCWilson In addition, fwiw, I have 30 Ṁ in this market. So, yes, I’m incentivized, but I’m in no way going to kill it on this prediction, mana-wise.
(Yes, I rule at prediction, but QED and all, principle of the thing, etc.)