I am working on a little something in the field of applied math (mostly with probabilities) and I hope it is not bs. I will probably make it publically available in a week, so let us see how this turns out!
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ54 | |
| 2 | Ṁ34 | |
| 3 | Ṁ14 | |
| 4 | Ṁ13 | |
| 5 | Ṁ11 |
People are also trading
@SneakySly I'm absolutely cool with this resolving as NO. We would have heard about the discovery by now.
@SneakySly I don’t really care if you resolve NO but it’s obviously not clear
You don’t know who the guy is, what the research was, or whether or not it was groundbreaking. There’s not even a definitive timeline on the info release
Resolving this market makes absolutely no sense given the zero info available, and it’s not in line with the mod/admin resolution policy
@Gen So anyone can create markets, ask outlandish questions, and lock people’s mana in just for fun?
@NicoDelon I offered to loan everyone with locked mana their mana, but yes, essentially.
Unless there has been significant policy change in the last month or so to subjective resolutions, this guy could straight up resolve YES without explanation too and you would have little recourse (other than maybe get an N/A) because of the nature of the claim.
Having your mana locked up for up to 2 months (loan return rate) should be an expected possibility when you bet on markets anyway.
@NicoDelon The argument against your mana being locked up is N/A anyway, not a “guess” resolution with no info
@Gen I don’t think you should have to give out loans because an inconsiderate clown made a market, but I respect your commitment to the norms.
@Gen I disagree with your framing that it’s not clear. We all know the underlying truth here and would be very surprised if proven otherwise.
@SneakySly But this market isn’t really about whether the result is groundbreaking is it? Isn’t it specifically about whether the market creator views their own work as groundbreaking? Which, given that they made the market, it seems their usage of the term does not align with typical usage of the term.
The author of the market said as much that the research was in probability.
Has been any groundbreaking news in Probability? If so, can someone confirm if it was made by the author of this market?
If any of those questions is NO, I think this market should be resolved by an admin/badge user to NO
@AllanLacy How long do you want to wait to find out? Who’s deciding if it’s groundbreaking?
Even if there was, we don’t even know who the market maker is.
Market should be N/A’d, or left to be decided later hoping the maker returns. You can see further discussion below but I don’t think admins will determine the result when it’s not clear (and such low stakes).
@Gen sure.
I mean, I'm not particularly invested in what the resolution ends up being.
For what it's worth, I think the market maker just trolled us all.
But sure, I dont mind waiting.
@Gen If someone claims an idea is groundbreaking, the burden of proof is surely on them. There's lots of ideas, few are actual discoveries, fewer still are groundgreaking.
This seems like a straightforward NO
@NicoDelon I think from their comments they were using a nonstandard definition of groundbreaking that set the bar much lower than how people normally use that term.
“groundbreaking as in would be actually a cool thing to know/discover/learn about and might change the way we view a few mathematical structures”
“Cool” is subjective, and technically any correct new idea can change the way a mathematical structure is viewed very slightly, even if it’s not groundbreaking in the way that other people would use that word.
@AllanLacy i think it´s clear the market maker either doesn´t matter or indeed is trolling us
@NicoDelon In fact, if you were banned before, if you delete your profile, you are unbanned (not sure if this has been fixed)
I believe a trustworthyish user can resolve markets that have been closed for a week with unambiguous resolution criteria, or for a month with ambiguous resolution criteria if the creator has been inactive for 6 months (then get resolved N/A). So this will probably be locked up for 6 months unless an admin steps in sooner.
@JimHays I don’t think admins would resolve this (other than N/A) as nobody knows the person, their idea, or if it’s groundbreaking
It seems obvious enough but it’s not unambiguous. It’s also possible the maker believes it was groundbreaking but they were anxious to share following some of the comments.
I think people underestimate the personal scrutiny they are inviting when they make personal markets, and I think it’s possible enough that this guy just dipped unrelated to the actual resolution itself. I hope they return to resolve it, I believe they still can with a hidden profile.
@Gen Just realised I’m the biggest YES holder- I don’t mind if it gets resolved NO
(My position was 35M to purchase lol I was just being supportive)
If anyone is out a big portion of their pile because of the market I’m happy to loan until it gets resolved
@Gen I think it would be sad if markets get resolved to N/A in situations like this [I don't care about this particular market].
Since P( market owner doesn't resolve market | idea not groundbreaking ) >> P ( market owner doesn't resolve market | idea is groundbreaking ), it means that the optimal betting strategy is putting the market at a much higher percentage than the probability of "idea is groundbreaking".
@FlorisvanDoorn If there is any evidence of probabilities being skewed because of “maker account deletion risk due to embarrassment” then sure, but I don’t think that has literally ever happened.
We don’t even know if that’s why they deleted their account.
It’s possible they went to publish their research and the CIA chased them down because it was too groundbreaking. We’ll never know if the maker doesn’t resolve themselves, as nobody knows what their research was or who they were.
If something groundbreaking were published, we wouldn’t know for months anyway. It is bad precedent for manifold to resolve markets with uncertainty.
My offer stands to loan anyone who is missing a big amount of mana, I’d literally rather personally pay everyone out than see this market get resolved without any further input from the maker who controls all the info and the subjective reasoning behind the resolution