Will the Time Person of the Year market make Manifold look really smart, or hopelessly delusional?
resolved Dec 6
Really Smart
Hopelessly Delusional

Resolves "really smart" if the actual person of the year was trading at 4% or higher prior to it becoming public, "hopelessly delusional" otherwise, except that "other" must be trading over 50% to resolve "really smart." Based on this comment by @BTE


Get Ṁ1,000 play money

🏅 Top traders

#NameTotal profit
Sort by:


DID IT????

I still feel pretty delusional 😅


Does "prior to it becoming public" mean "before the winner is announced" or "before the short list is announced"?

@DanielParker I wasn't aware that a short list was typically announced prior to the winner being announced. Without having looked at any such announcement (if one has been made, which I haven't (yet) checked), I want to say that it should be before the announcement of the short list. But I'm open to other people saying I should change my mind on this.

@MattLashofSullivan Now having looked at the announcement, I think this should resolve based on the market price prior to the announcement - you can clearly see in the linked market that all these options were trading pretty flat until this AM when TIME announced the shortlist.

I will deem the announcement of the shortlist to be the first part of the process of the POTY "becoming public." Anyone who has a strong argument against this can say so between now and Wednesday, keeping in mind my preference for rewarding prediction vs. rewarding reaction to news.

Hid an earlier comment - @Joshua reopened the linked market. Sticking with the announced criteria, but could be different actual people.

So we are looking at "really smart" if it's Sam Altman, ChatGPT, Artificial Intelligence, or Taylor Swift. "Hopelessly delusional" otherwise.

@MattLashofSullivan want to extend the close date here?

@Joshua I think not - this will surely be announced imminently and BTE's market is also closed. Further, the POTY articles have surely already been written, there's no chance now for news events to influence the outcome.

I'm interested in actual predictions, i don't find the game of "who can spot the news event fastest" to be very worthwhile and i think it encourages unhealthy phone use.


bought Ṁ10 of Really Smart YES

57% of the current % is on options higher than 4%. As the announcement gets closer presumably the winning person will probably increase in % . Seems likely that Really Smart is underpriced

bought Ṁ10 of Hopelessly Delusional YES

Sam Altman probably just took AI out of the running. I took this screenshot as I saw the news of Altman getting fired.

bought Ṁ25 of Hopelessly Delusional YES

I've been long looking for a way to make a meta-bet on "Manifold Markets is far too sanguine on AI and its importance in the broader world". Given how the refenced market is looking, this is certainly akin to that.

sold Ṁ27 of Hopelessly Delusional YES

It seems that betting "Hopelessly Delusional" on this market is currently equivalent to betting NO on ChatGPT (17%) + Sam Altman (11%) + Artificial Intelligence (8%) + Bibi (7%) + Xi (7%) + The AI (4%) + Taylor Swift (4%) = (1-.17)*(1-.11)*(1-.08)*(1-.07)*(1-.07)*(1-.04)*(1-.04) = 55%. So this market is reasonably priced. On the other hand, if you think none of them will win, you can get better odds by betting NO on ChatGPT and Sam Altman individually (and possibly arbitraging by betting "Really Smart" on this market).

@DanielParker Unless your betting "No" on The AI or Taylor takes them below 4%, in which case they fall out of the calculation.

It also gets complicated with "Other", but I included that clause as the most reasonable way to deal with the fact that there are like thousands of other people Time could choose and it would seem not to capture the intuition if Time picked, e.g. me (they won't), and Manifold thought there was only a 10% chance of Other, I feel like we would look more hopelessly delusional than really smart.

So if the actual person is trading at 10% and "Other" is trading at 10%, this resolves "hopelessly delusional"?

@DavidBolin no. If the main market resolves to a specific person (or AI or whatever) who was trading at 4% or higher, this resolves "really smart", regardless of how "other" was trading.

But if the main market resolves "other" then this only resolves "really smart" if "other" was trading over 50%.

@MattLashofSullivan Thanks. "except that "other" must be trading over 50% to resolve "really smart."" sounded like a general condition.

Market of the year!!!

Meme Reaction GIF

I feel like I should be quoted in the description! 😂

@BTE Ask and ye shall receive.

I would love if Manifold allowed a market that is functionally a YES/NO market, but where you can rename the options. I really wanted the options here to be titled as they are, but this leads to the interface allowing yes/no on each individual option which makes no sense, and also leads to me getting only 3 mana instead of 5 for each unique trader.

Ah the price we pay for humor 🤣

bought Ṁ10 of Hopelessly Delusional YES

@MattLashofSullivan new market: will Manifold update the Yes/No question type to allow for customisation?

@MattLashofSullivan If you get more than 50 traders, then standard YES/NO markets only give you M1 per trader, but the multiple choice markets still give M3. So you if you get 100 traders then it’s better to have a multiple choice market

@MattLashofSullivan You can always specify in the description of a standard binary market what YES and NO mean.

@NicoDelon Yeah, you can, but that would be less funny.

@MattLashofSullivan When the multiple answers were linked that’s effectively what it did but that sucked for most markets so they disabled it