Resolves YES if Time publishes an article on Manifold or Manifold.love before the end of 2023. Manifold or Manifold.love must be the subject of at least half of the article.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ1,274 | |
| 2 | Ṁ853 | |
| 3 | Ṁ721 | |
| 4 | Ṁ663 | |
| 5 | Ṁ544 |
People are also trading
After doing absolutely nothing but Buy Yes on a weekly basis for over a month, the largest Yes holder saw new information today that caused him to sell Yes to 16%, twice, and place a limit order for No at 25%.
This is a notable change, yet the market remains at a higher percentage right now than it was at the time Panfilo noticed the interesting new developments.
What gives?
The information Panfilo was acting on was the publication of this article:
https://time.com/6457597/ai-dating/
It is written by the same reporter that Austin was talking to, and talks about dating in a modern world, but does not mention Manifold at all. I think it is a reasonable assumption to make, to think they decided to take the article in a different direction after not finding any strong ways to insert Manifold into the discussion. Note that the previous reports I've seen from the team regarding fielding questions from Time were specifically about manifold.love, the dating site.
There is also a possibility this is one article in a series of multiple articles about dating that Will Henshall could be working on.....
@Eliza Thanks, I didn't see Panfilo's comments about this, thought you were referring earlier to them noticing just that there were few Time issues remaining this year. That seems compelling!
(feature request: reply to comment with sell)
@chrisjbillington It was something I saw on Discord earlier in the day -- I sold all my Yes shares immediately but was surprised the market moved the other direction.
@Eliza I think the upward movement was just me hedging for my "conditional on NO Time article, NO high MAUs" bet.
On the NYT article, these were the top profit makers. I am not betting against Austin, FUH, and S G on this one 🙃
I'm definitely over-exposed but we got two issues left and I think we're due for a hit piece (sorry).
@Tumbles Well, he didn't meet my 45% limit order, he only bought to 47%, and I filled that one completely, so he wasn't scammed
@Panfilo Literally nothing, I'm betting NO to see if anyone (e.g. Austin) pushes back because that info is relevant to my other betting.
@AmandaSmith see the new york times talk about this based growing site https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/08/technology/prediction-markets-manifold-manifest.html
(maybe it won't happen but i don't think anyone can know that yet except maybe TIME employees, so i would encourage you not to put 1000M on NO)
@AmandaSmith same, but you can see the article title and the website that concur with this possibility that MM might and does get national media attention
@TheBayesian well I suppose this doesn't nescesarily mean a print article so my confidence is sown a lot.
@AmandaSmith The article is supposed to be about manifold.love, not Manifold itself. That website has less than 1000 users created (not even active users). I don't see how that's going to pass any editorial review.
What is this?
What is Manifold?
Are our predictions accurate?
Why use play money?
Why use play money?People are also trading
What is this?
What is Manifold?
Are our predictions accurate?
Why use play money?
Why use play money?