PLEASE READ THE DESCRIPTION
Users should be able to download the app or access the web-app from a browser. The app has to be available in atleast two different countries and there should not be any other requirements to access the app other than geographical.
Edit: A product available only to X premium users would resolve this question to yes since in theory anyone can pay to use it.
EditTwo: If the product is in the middle of being rolled-out to users it doesn’t count. The roll-out has to be completed.
Related questions
from market description:
The app has to be available in atleast two different countries
Only rolling out to US right now. I think it’s unlikely that changes before year end:
https://x.com/x/status/1732880272088076454?s=46&t=w8K1ymlMU0cSwtGlbRCU6Q
@GabeGarboden I think it can go both ways right now. It makes sense that the market went up since launching in one country is one step closer to launching in two. However, given that we only have 3 weeks lett in 2023, 81% might be too high but also could be accurate 🤷🏻♂️
@Soli I assume the "longer you've been a subscriber" thing is about the order US Premium+ subscribers are getting access over the week - my reading (could be wrong) is all of them will have access by the end of the week (edit: by the end of the week-long period of the rollout, that is).
But indeed, no announcement yet about a release for users in another country.
@chrisjbillington anthropic was 3.5 months to rollout to more countries, bard 2.5 months, bing didn't have such a US/UK then later x,y,z countries, couple weeks to rollout to the world.
Grok could take a couple weeks like this, but there a very good chance they delay.
Does the app have to actually work as promised? Fully self-driving car has been "arrives in 2 minutes" for years, several rockets have launched imperfectly, and Twitter has not been a net benefit to humanity this past year.
@ClubmasterTransparent Valid question but this market is not concerned with the reliability of the product. You can start another question for the reliability.
If the user will need to meet the following or similar criteria does this count as "other requirements"?
@Metastable The question description clearly states that if premium is the only requirement then the question resolves as Yes.
I don't love that you changed the nature of the question after first publishing. Previously the requirement was anyone could access without a waitlist or blocker. They require a Premium+ subscription.
@quantizor The requirement that there should not be a waitlist still applies. I think having to pay in order to use the product is normal. If getting to use the product requires premium subscription and users have to be accepted through a waitlist then this question resolves to No.
@quantizor As Manifold's new SME in making markets peopli will beef about, i like @Soli s adapting and openness to listening to new ideas. When they update their market description all traders in it receive a notification. It's on the trader to go look at the update.
@quantizor Thanks for letting us know. I'm neuro-interesting in a different way but it is super helpful to me when someone just says they're autistic, really reduces crossed wires. @Soli personally I'm comfortable with ambiguity but some people might perceive the clarification you made as a switcheroo. I think your offer to refund @quantizor their mana is a graceful move.
@Soli I have 0 stake in this market, just empathising with Soli's position. Markets are usually created ambigiously because you can't catch all real world scenario's and as a market maker you have to adjust and rule on whatever happens. And whichever way you do it, someone's going to get a disadvantage.
@Fedor Thank you for the kind words. I actually already refunded @quantizor his Mana. I personally do not bet on markets before asking clarification questions in case there is any ambiguity I see. I don't expect from the creators of the market to think of every possible edge case and cover it. I am happy to refund anyone who bet before the edit and looses money only because the edit. This way I feel no one can complain :) - I think > 95% of participants actually bet after the edit. If the thing doesn't become available even to premium subscribers then the edit won't even matter.
The edit was introduced based on the clarification question by @JohannesKoch
@Soli Have a look at any of the questions I have made for examples of what I mean. For a market to be well-designed, the criteria for resolution must be well-defined and should not materially change after the market is created. If things change so much that the market is overall invalidated, then it should resolve or be closed. Anything else is not fair game.
@quantizor I am always happy to learn from others so I will check your questions and hopefully pick 1-2 lessons. I feel in general it is very hard to do this for AI related stuff where there are so many unknowns. However, I agree with you that markets with clear resolution criteria that correctly covers all cases are great.
Related questions
