Posts
Active 4 days ago
MANA MERCH SHOP
We are in the final stages of implementing a merch store with items priced in mana, but we need your help!
Submit your designs on this market and if your submission makes it to the shop, we will send you a free piece of merch with that design!
We want your input even if you don't design anything yourself, and there will be plenty of mana to be made in trading the subsidized answers. Follow the market and stay involved.
(https://manifold.markets/embed/Gen/mana-merch-shop-which-designs-will)
Active 7 days ago
I'm back.
Sorry everyone, after deleting my account in protest of The Pivot TOS changes (now reversed) and taking a year-long hiatus your favorite mod is here to cause trouble again.
Feel free to let me know what's bothering you. Examples of valid stuff to send my way: markets that need someone to just hit a button already!, issues with game designs (on or off Manifold), recipes for soup that just aren't quite good enough yet, existential questions about life and death, invites to orgies, etc.
This post thing is cool and new. I wonder if it only shows for like my followers or if I've just spammed the whole site using my mod powers. 🙃 
Active 21 days ago
FOLDED Corruption
I entered FOLDED, a game pitched as a large scale social experiment and art project hosted by @Bandors, with excitement and curiosity. A minimalist concept: check in once per day or be eliminated. Sounds simple, fair, and like a fun endurance challenge, right?
Well, that illusion did not last long.
One player, @retr0id, has been exploiting the system using scripts to check in automatically, bypassing the very premise of human endurance and commitment the game supposedly tests. That alone bends the spirit of the game. But it gets worse.
As a protest, I made my password public, a form of self sabotage and social experiment in itself to test the communities ethics. In response, @retr0id took control of my account, logging in and out every 30 seconds to sabotage my ability to check in. I had to set up a defense system just to stop getting kicked off my own session, ridiculous for something that is supposedly about routine and patience.
I reported this harassment to the host. The response?
Shenanigans are valid and encouraged
So automated check ins and harassment via account hijacking are valid. But here is the kicker: voicing protest in the comments was considered unacceptable. For speaking out, I was blocked by the host. I can still play, technically, but I cannot comment or communicate, silenced without recourse.
To make matters worse, I had thousands of mana on the line, with bonus prizes promised for finishing 10th, 5th, 3rd, and of course for winning. Entry alone cost 2000 mana, a substantial fee by Manifold standards. When I asked @Bandors to reset my password and even offered 50 mana for the trouble, I was told it was too hard to change. A simple password reset in a game about endurance, too hard.
FOLDED has devolved from a game of patience into a tech savvy popularity contest where
Coding trumps commitment
Harassment is brushed off as shenanigans
And dissent gets you shadowbanned
If this is performance art, then the message is clear
Cheat smart. Stay quiet. Do not challenge power.
If this is a psychological experiment, then congratulations, you have recreated 1984. The winner will not be the most disciplined, but the one most willing to manipulate the system unchecked.
If that is the art you want to create, fine
But do not pretend it is still a game.
Active 4 months ago
No more gif avatars, they're too distracting, sorry!
You'll see just a generic gray user icon now instead.
Active a month ago
Announcing Achievements
We have just released Achievements! Visit the Achievements tab on your profile page to check it out, or perhaps take a peek at your friend's. Hover over an achievement card to see what percentile you fall into amongst all users.
[image]Any feedback is appreciated, particularly:
-Any additional achievements you'd like to see (we already have some more planned relating to all-time peak portfolio metrics).
-Any additional features related to achievements
-Any values you notice that seem to be wrong
You can expect in the near future:
1) Clicking achievements to see the leaderboard for each
2) Links to specific markets/trades responsible for a particular achievement (thanks for the idea Strutheo)
3) More achievements such as consecutive seasons in masters, highest ever loan, and more!
Active 11 days ago
I am the president. I am @realDonaldTrump.
You know, they said it couldn’t be done. They said we couldn’t turn things around. But we did. We did it before, and we’re going to do it again — bigger, better, and stronger than ever before.
We had the greatest economy in the history of the world. Everyone was winning — jobs were up, taxes were down, the border was secure, and America was respected again. Countries all over the world respected us. They didn’t laugh at us. They didn’t take advantage of us. We made great deals. Tremendous deals.
Then — disaster. Total disaster. Crooked politicians, weak leadership, chaos at the border, inflation like we’ve never seen before. Energy prices through the roof. Crime in our cities. They don’t know what they’re doing. Or maybe they do — maybe it’s on purpose.
But we’re not going to let them destroy this country. We’re bringing it back.
We’re going to drill, baby, drill. We’re going to bring manufacturing home. We’re going to protect our farmers, our truckers, our incredible police, and our beautiful, wonderful veterans — the best people anywhere in the world.
We will stop the invasion at the southern border. We will end the crime wave. We will defend your Second Amendment, your First Amendment — all of them. We will stand up to China, we will bring jobs back from China, and we will put America First. Always.
[image]
Active 14 days ago
AI Safety Research Futarchy: Using Prediction Markets to Choose Research Projects for MARS
Summary
Geodesic is going to use prediction markets to select their projects for MARS 4.0 and we need your help to make the markets run efficiently! Please read through the proposals, and then trade on the markets for the proposals you think might succeed or fail. We intend to choose the best proposals in two weeks!
Full proposals are in Google doc linked below, links to markets are in the section "The Projects".
Google Doc (similar content to this post + full proposal overviews).
LessWrong post (similar content to this post).
Introduction
Geodesic is a new AI safety startup focused on research that is impactful for short AGI/ASI timelines. As part of this, we are committed to mentoring several projects as part of the Mentorship for Alignment Research Students program (MARS), run by the Cambridge AI Safety Hub (CAISH).
We are also excited about new ways to choose and fund research that reflect the aggregated perspectives of our team and the broader community. One way of doing this is using conditional prediction markets, also known as Futarchy, where people bet on the outcomes of taking various actions so that the predicted-best action can be taken.
We believe a system similar to this might be really useful for deciding on future research proposals, agendas, and grants. Good rationalists test their beliefs, and as such, we are doing a live-fire test to see if the theory works in practice.
We are going to apply this to select research projects for MARS 4.0, an AI safety upskilling program like MATS or SPAR, based in Cambridge UK. We have drafted a number of research proposals, and want the community to bet on how likely good outcomes are for each project (conditional on being selected). We will then choose the projects which are predicted to do best.
To our knowledge, this is the first time Futarchy will be publicly used to decide on concrete research projects.
Futarchy
For those familiar with Futarchy / decision markets, feel free to skip this section. Otherwise, we will do our best to explain how it works.
When you want to make a decision with Futarchy, you first need a finite set of possible actions to be taken, and a success metric, whose true value will be known about at some point in the future. Then, for each action, a prediction market is created to try and predict the future value of the success metric given that decision is taken. At some fixed time, the action with the highest predicted success is chosen, and all trades on the other markets are reverted. When the actual value of the success metric is finally known, the market for the chosen action is resolved, and those who predicted correctly are rewarded for their insights. This creates an incentive structure that rewards people who have good information or insights to trade on the markets, improving the predictions for taking each action, and overall causing you to make the decision that the pool of traders thinks will be best.
As a concrete example, consider a company deciding whether or not to fire a CEO, and using the stock price one year after the decision as the success metric. Two markets would be created, one predicting the stock price if they're fired, and one predicting the stock price if they're kept on. Then, whichever one is trading higher at decision time is used to make the decision.
For those interested in further reading about Futarchy, Robin Hanson has written extensively about it. Some examples include its foundations and motivation, speculation about when and where it might be useful, and why it can be important to let the market decide.
The Metrics
Unlike stock prices of a company, there's no clear single metric by which research can be judged. Because of this, we've decided on a small selection of binary outcomes that will each be predicted separately, and then we will use their average in order to make the final decisions. We're not claiming these are the best metrics to judge a research project by, but we think they will be appropriate for the MARS program and sufficient for this experiment. The outcomes are:
A LessWrong post is produced within 6 months and gains 50 upvotes or more within a month of posting.
If a LessWrong post is produced, it gains 150 upvotes or more within a month of posting.
A paper is produced and uploaded to arXiv within 9 months.
If a paper is produced, it is accepted to a top ML conference (ICLR, ICML, or NeurIPS) within 6 months of being uploaded to arXiv.
If a paper is produced, it receives 10 citations or more within one year of being uploaded to arXiv.
Clarifications:
Unless otherwise stated, timeframes are given from when the research begins, i.e. the start of the MARS program
Updates to posts and papers will be considered the same entity as the original for purposes of outcome resolution (i.e. If a paper is produced and uploaded to arXiv within 9 months, but it is edited after this before being accepted at a conference, (4) still resolves YES)
Some outcomes are conditional on others as follows: outcome (2) will resolve N/A if (1) resolves NO, outcomes (4)-(6) will resolve N/A if (3) resolves NO
The Projects
There are 3 groups of proposals, and from within each group we will choose the single predicted-best project. The groupings represent the mentors for that project. To read through each of the proposals and the bios for each mentor, please see the Google doc. Currently we plan to close the markets and choose the projects on Monday the 12th of October. Below we provide a quick overview of each and link to its respective prediction market.
Group 1: Cameron Tice
Goal Crystallisation: Investigating whether AI models that fake alignment perfectly during training retain their original goals or have them changed despite following through with deceptive alignment.
Post-training order and CoT Monitorability: Examining whether different post-training orders (applying RLHF after reasoning training) affect models' tendency to obfuscate deceptive reasoning in their chain-of-thought outputs.
Online Learning for Research Sabotage Mitigation: Attempting to use online learning to train AI systems away from research sabotage by creating deliberately underperforming model organisms and applying RL to try and improve their research performance.
Group 2: Puria Radmard & Shi Feng
Salient features of self-models: Testing whether LLMs have genuine self-models or just recognize stylistic patterns by examining if self-recognition training generalizes across different types of content.
Exploring more metacognitive capabilities of LLMs: Investigating whether LLMs can metacognitively monitor their own internal probability distributions and predictive models, with implications for deceptive alignment and AI safety.
Group 3: Lennie Wells
Model organisms resisting generalisation: Testing whether AI models learn the distribution of tasks under which humans have good oversight, and resist generalisation beyond this distribution.
Detection game: Running a ‘detection game’ to investigate how we can best prompt trusted monitors to detect research sabotage.
Research sabotage dataset: Creating a public dataset of tasks reflecting current and future AI safety research that can be used to study underelicitation and sandbagging.
Model Emulation: Can we use LLMs to predict other LLM’s capabilities?
Go trade!
We hope to use prediction markets to effectively choose which research projects we should pursue, as well as conducting a fun experiment on the effectiveness of Futarchy for real-world decision making. The incentive structure of a prediction market motivates those who have good research taste or insights to implicitly share with us their beliefs and knowledge, helping us make the best decision possible. That said, anyone is free to join in and trade, and the more people who do the better the markets perform. So we need your help! Please read through the proposals and vote on the markets, be a part of history by partaking in this experiment!Active 7 days ago
Leagues market creator updates
1) Profits and losses from trading on your own markets no longer count towards your league's earnings. This was to reduce the number of people winning their leagues by creating a new market with significant liquidity and correcting the probability from the initial 50%.
2) Unique trader bonuses are back for leagues! Any unique trader bonuses gained from a new trader betting on your market since the season start date will count. However, to keep things fair, we will check if the market was created within the last 31 days of the bonus and only count those that are. This keeps market creation more in line with the rules of trades having to be within the given month; however, it doesn't create weird incentives of waiting to create your market.
Active 2 months ago
Manifold Game Show Idea
I want to make a sort of game show here on Manifold where 2 contestants and the game show host each put up a blind into a bounty market pot.
The 2 contestants are put into a Prisoners' Dilemma situation where they can either share the pot 50-50, or try to steal it all. If they both try to steal, the host gets the pot.
Contestants would be accepted on to the show if they have a similar RISK rating, using the @crowlsyong RISK Credit Score system as an ELO rating.
A market is made for each contestant, allowing the public to bet on if they will share the pot, steal it, or walk away and forfeit it (ie take no action by the deadline).
Contestants are encouraged to make backroom deals with anybody from the public to encourage manipulation on those markets. Or, they can bluff about making back room deals. Who's to say?
Who thinks this would be a bad idea?
Active 6 days ago
Folded, Month Three
🎴 Introducing: FOLDED
Manifold’s first large-scale social experiment & art project
A test of patience. A battle of routine. A war of attrition.
Join the experiment. Win the prize.
💰 12,000+ mana up for grabs -- and the prize pool is growing!
WHAT IS FOLDED?
FOLDED is a minimalist game with a single rule:
🕛 Check in once per day. Or be eliminated.
It sounds simple, but there’s a catch - it won’t stay that way.
🗓️ DAILY CHECK-IN
You must visit the check-in page once per day before midnight UTC.
Miss a day? You’re out. No second chances.
❌ ELIMINATION
Players who don’t check in are instantly eliminated.
Each day, the pool gets smaller. The tension rises.
💸 ENTRY FEE
To enter, send 2,000 mana to the prize pool via Managram.
Think of it as your ticket to the endurance games.
🏆 WINNER TAKES ALL
The last player standing takes everything.
Every mana from every eliminated player goes to the final survivor.
🔒 DIFFICULTY
It will become harder to check in over time.
The interface may evolve. The rules might twist.
Stay alert. Adapt. Survive.
HOW TO JOIN
Step 1: Pay your entry fee (CLOSED)
Managram 2,000 mana:
👉 https://manifold.markets/Bandors?tab=payments&a=2000
Step 2: Make your FOLDED account
No email required. Just your manafold username.
👉 https://folded-three.vercel.app/
Is this a game? An art piece? A psychological experiment?
Yes.
[image][image]
Active 3 months ago
Pure spam page
https://manifold.markets/MarcusAbramovitch/what-youtube-channel-will-have-the This page has more spam than content
[link preview]
Active a month ago
Handling markets while the creator deliberates
Goal: Discussion
What's the best thing for a creator to do while they deliberate something about their market? How can the site help them do this while maintaining a fair trading environment?
Application
Any time a creator is faced with making a choice about their market. It can be: choosing whether to resolve it, whether something 'counts' in the market, tweaks to the rules, or dealing with surprising things that are not in the criteria.
Problem
If the creator leaves trading open while they are unsure how to rule, traders often start trading on "What will the creator decide" rather than "What will happen in the future". This type of trading can sometimes eclipse trading on the actual question at hand, and it can also influence the creator's decision-making process.
Current options
There are several strategies creators have used over the years, they seem to all have some upside and some downside.
Leave trading open: Make multiple comments and be open about your thought process. Traders respond to every comment. You do get the benefit of instant response to your ideas, but traders may feel misled if your initial comments do not line up with your final decision. The most common pitfall is creators frequently issue contradictory clarifications.
Leave trading open but don't comment: Just let everyone battle it out while you deliberate, and don't post about it until you've come to a decision. This prevents the creator from making multiple contradictory responses, but can leave traders just as upset if the final ruling is not in line with the way they read the criteria. For "Will X happen before Y"-type markets, if the creator does not respond to questions about whether event Z 'counts', the traders often eventually decide that no, Z did not count, even if the creator never issued a ruling about it.
Trade on it yourself: Sometimes creators who do trade on their own markets start trading when things are in question. Maybe that reveals their own thoughts?
Close trading pending decision: It is not obvious to a new creator, but they have the power to close trading at any time using the same window where they can change the closing time. By closing trading before initiating discussion, the creator can avoid disgruntled traders who were influenced by thinking-in-progress. There are some downsides: Reopening the market is tricky because there is often a price delta pre- and post-closing. Who gets to 'steal' that liquidity? What if the creator is not around fast enough to close trading and a bunch of people already made trades about "What will the creator decide"? There is also an awkward interplay with league scoring here once every month.
Discussion topic
So, is this really a problem that needs solving? Is it okay how it is? Should we be looking at better options here?
Here are a few possible 'helps' for the situation, not necessarily solutions:
Better UI/guidance for creators in this situation -- the site could give them advice on avoiding common problems.
More sophisticated close/reopen mechanism -- there have been several suggestions for a more fair market reopening procedure, including 'auctions'
Provisional trading mode -- let people trade while the market is in limbo, or some new 'not-quite-closed' mode, but those trades will all be N/A'd if the creator decides that it resolved at the time they closed it earlier
Yank the liquidity -- maybe "closing a market" is actually just removing the creator's liquidity, but traders can still trade with limit orders. The creator is usually the one putting up all the juice, let them withdraw all but 1 mana or something, until they've ruled, and then let them put the market back live with fresh liquidity at the price they think it should be at. Traders can still trade in the interim if they wish.
Got any additional good ideas? Maybe you think this is a huge nothingburger and not a big deal. I don't think this is the #1 problem facing the site, but could be a fun discussion.Active 7 days ago
Evidence that my market isn't a scam (link in post)
Many traders on @/realDonaldTrump/am-i-screwed-read-desc think that I am not actually in eighth grade and I made up the whole thing. To semi-prove that it is real, here is the entire email exchange between me and my classmates and my principal, chronologically.
Original Email (from me, to most of my classmates (not the narcs)):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iBqn55q5MXF6NBhGNuuffP217GDAm1uFRsFPNps7tR0/edit?usp=sharing
An email from a classmate to the entire grade and the principal:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MbN9neZRL4aFujNY098nQmDdI2UXpqTTv2Wa8yjn_oo/edit?usp=sharing
An email from the principal after seeing the original email:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fB99hfjw25HJjdHVfINkfjYk10oxQ0kTHeNNt-4t2FE/edit?usp=sharing
A reply from me to the principal:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/113NLWssQQZ938bwQmesC2i5gaioVxEazcISE48NVJn4/edit?usp=sharing
Principal's Reply:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KzAoT9ldXhk8VnPXFGC_lHfbfHXk0tUImezNupro0Tk/edit?usp=sharingActive 2 days ago
Peer to Peer Loans with @Quroe
This is a ledger of loans I have actively open. A Debt Note, if you will. Completed loans are removed, but loans paid back late or not at all will be memorialized. This is for my record keeping, but others may use it as public data or as a place to solicit loans to/from me if they wish.
Mana I'm loaning to other users:
@ItsMe - Loaned 4,000 mana. 5,000 mana due on or before 11:59:59pm EST Dec 15, 2025. Tentatively covered by C100 RISK policy.
Loans not honored, derogatory marks:
@Spin - Loaned 2,000 mana. 3,000 mana was not paid back by June 28, 2025. Covered by C100 RISK policy. Policy exercised. This debt security has been transferred to RISK.
@Spin - Loaned 3,000 mana. 4,500 mana was not paid back by June 29, 2025. Covered by C100 RISK policy. Policy exercised. This debt security has been transferred to RISK.
Mana I'm being loaned from other users:
No outstanding loans.
Mana I'm holding in escrow for other users:
No outstanding holdings. 
Active 2 months ago
Courtesy of informing in advance and/or announcing withdrawal of significant liquidity?
I know for myself that being informed that liquidity has been withdrawn from a market affects my trading, so it would be a courtesy to be as aware as possible of actions in that regard, in my view. I can understand that there is no natural incentive to do so, but it would be nice. Certainly being above board about it would improve the taste in ones mouth, when encountering it. I know we do see the liquidity in the info screen, but nevertheless...
Active a month ago
Frequent Market Terms' Recommended Definitions
[WORK IN PROGRESS] You are more than welcome to contribute in the comments by asking for words to be added, or proposing definitions / workshopping current defs.
announces
(by an org / company / group, of a product): The entity, or an official representative or partner, makes an official public statement about the product, beyond vague references / hints / teasers.
(by an person, of a statement or fact): The person says the statement or fact in a publicly verifiable way. eg. "Will Elon Musk announce he doesn't plan to have more children in 2025"
releases
(by an entity, of a product): The entity makes the product accessible to members of the public in at least some region. This excludes a closed beta.
by [time]. Warning: If timezone differences may be material to the resolution, they must be specified.
by [specific moment]: The event must have happened before that specific moment. eg. by March 23, 11:59 PM ET. A useful way to specify a moment is to say "start of [date range]" (eg. by start of 2026) or "end of [date range]" (eg. by EOY 2025).
by [day]: We recommend not using this term (use "before" or "in" instead). Meaning must be inferred from likely intend of market creator. eg. usually, "by March 31" == "Before April" == "by April 1st"
by [year]: We recommend not using this term. The market's "close time" may indicate what the market creator intended.
before [date range]
The event must have happened before the start of the date range.
in [date range]
The event must happen between the start and end of the date range.
win
(Of a professional cycling race or stage): Defaults to the winner declared on the day at the podium celebration after the race. Later disqualification or alteration of the results (the same day, next day, or any time in the future) would not change the resolution.
AGI (or Artificial General Intelligence)
a totally unserious term whose use should result in the market being unranked and treated as a meme market
furry
An individual who demonstrably likes to dress as some animal(s) OR demonstrably identifies as a furryActive a month ago
Folded, Month Two
🎴 Introducing: FOLDED
Manifold’s first large-scale social experiment & art project
A test of patience. A battle of routine. A war of attrition.
Join the experiment. Win the prize.
💰 12,000+ mana up for grabs -- and the prize pool is growing!
WHAT IS FOLDED?
FOLDED is a minimalist game with a single rule:
🕛 Check in once per day. Or be eliminated.
It sounds simple, but there’s a catch - it won’t stay that way.
🗓️ DAILY CHECK-IN
You must visit the check-in page once per day before midnight UTC.
Miss a day? You’re out. No second chances.
❌ ELIMINATION
Players who don’t check in are instantly eliminated.
Each day, the pool gets smaller. The tension rises.
💸 ENTRY FEE
To enter, send 2,000 mana to the prize pool via Managram.
Think of it as your ticket to the endurance games.
🏆 WINNER TAKES ALL
The last player standing takes everything.
Every mana from every eliminated player goes to the final survivor.
🔒 DIFFICULTY
It will become harder to check in over time.
The interface may evolve. The rules might twist.
Stay alert. Adapt. Survive.
HOW TO JOIN
Step 1: Pay your entry fee (CLOSED)
Managram 2,000 mana:
👉 https://manifold.markets/Bandors?tab=payments&a=2000
Step 2: Make your FOLDED account
No email required. Just your manafold username.
👉 https://folded-three.vercel.app/
Is this a game? An art piece? A psychological experiment?
Yes.
[image]Active a month ago
Next league season we'll count trades on one's own markets 1hr after creation
based on feedback from https://manifold.markets/post/leagues-market-creator-updatesActive 5 months ago
Manifold discussion forum
Discuss anything non-TOS-violatory related to manifold hereActive 3 months ago
Share the most blatant lies you encountered on the platform
Sometimes people on Manifold are intentionally deceptive -- for fun or profit.
I'd love to see some of the best examples. Did you ever find someone who sold their soul by lying in a comment in order to profit on a market?
deceit, deception, lying, lie
Active 2 months ago
Happy Manifest 2025! 100K Mana Surprise
to celebrate im adding 1k mana subsidies to 100 of my bigger markets, glhf
Active 24 days ago
Worst calibrated market ever?
What market have you seen which had the highest probability of resolving YES but ending up resolving NO (or vice versa)? Bonus points if you believe that traders were making a poor analysis (and not just unlucky). Extra bonus points if the market had many traders.
Active a month ago
Best books about ancient history?
The best ancient history (pre-400 AD) books I know of are Adler's Origins of Judaism and Jaynes's Origins of Consciousness. Since you guys are smart, do you have any suggestions for even better books about ancient history?Active 5 months ago
Help me understand my mana loss aversion that makes me not bet on any markets than surefire ones.
Any advice so I'm not scared to arbitrage markets that can still lose me mana?Active 16 days ago
Rudimentary code for Kelly criterion betting
#Program and variables
print("This is a Kelly-crietrion based bet calculator")
mana = float(input("Enter the amount of mana you have: "))
odds = float(input("Enter your estimation of the actual market probability between 0 to 1(average): "))
resolution = int(input("Enter what you think the market will resolve (which direction you are betting), 0 for no and 1 for yes: "))
profits = float(input("Enter the ratio of shares to mana when you bet the market up/down to your estimation as a decimal MINUS 1 (e.g. 100 mana for 500 shares is (500/100)-1 = 5-1 = 4): "))
leverage = float(input("Enter the leverage on Kelly (e.g. If you want to be conservative, you can bet half of Kelly suggestion, or if you want to be agressive, you can bet double): "))
#Validity-of-answers
if odds > 1 or odds < 0:
print("Invalid. Please try again")
elif mana < 0:
print("Invalid. Please try again")
elif profits < 0:
print("Invalid. Please try again")
#Calculation
if resolution == 1:
amount = (((profits*odds)-(1-odds))/profits)*mana*leverage
else:
amount = (((profits*(1-odds))-odds)/profits)*mana*leverage
print(f"You should bet {amount}")
Active 3 months ago
Has anyone attempted to quantify the "worseness" of large MC markets with many 0% answers?
Markets like this:
@/Tetraspace/who-will-be-elected-president-in-20
Have loads of 0% answers or <1% answers. Have you attempted to quantify how that affects betting on the >1% answers? Can you quantify it? Seems like a fun exercise.
Active 2 months ago
Manifold shark tank!
This is a creative version of shark tank but for manifold markets. It would work by someone pitching a market idea in the comments, and based upon the market idea, and how much people enjoy it, people in the comments can reply, and maybe invest in it. By investing, you would mangram them based on the deal, and the rest is up to the others. This should be a resource, and I will take it down if people get scammed. This is just for people who are new to manifold, to get financial help if others with more mana want to help. The deals would be like loans and interest can be applied.
Active 7 days ago
Contractability Design
Contracts are not enforceable by fiat. Front-end costs of writing contracts yield incomplete contracts that are also insensitive to stakes, while back-end costs of evidence do not, from Roberto Corrao, Joel P. Flynn, and Karthik Sastry https://www.nber.org/papers/w34379Active 2 months ago
Quroe's Dead-Man Switch
If you're reading this, and I haven't traded or commented for 30 days, then I am dead or detained. I do not consent to prediction markets about this until day 21 of inactivity. After that, it would be an honor.
This description may be updated manually to adjust the numbers or to remand it entirely, all at my descretion.Active 2 months ago
A Manifold Game Show with an almost 40k prize pool!!
Awesome
https://manifold.markets/ManifoldChallenge/introducing-the-manifold-challengeActive 2 months ago
Mods, PLEASE install anti-spam measures
Spam is now popping up in my DMs. I am tired of seeing this. The message below seems to be a scam as well.
[image]I would also request a ban of this account.
Active a month ago
jim order notification opt-in thread
Comment on this post to opt in (or out) of notifications for when jim places a "jim order" on a market. Jim orders are generally large limit orders at better-than-market prices. Active 5 months ago
What went down at Nash Pit Manifest 2025?
Post the deals you made and things you did here. Let's recap for the history books. Active 16 days ago
Why are you using Manifold?
Can you identify any reasons you opened the Manifold website today? Or in general? Or ever? Curious how today's site members feel about this question.
Active a month ago
@evan situation discussion post
This is where you can discuss the current @evan (and alts) situation. He has shut down manifold in spectacular fashion. There will be a post that shows everything that happened in chronological order soon.
statement from @evan
[image][image]Active 4 months ago
Admins & mods can delete spam comments
Admins & mods can fully remove comments from market pages with the delete button. This should only be used for spam.
Note: this doesn't delete the comment from the database, it just filters it from the comments endpoint.
[image]
Active 4 months ago
RISK - Limit Order App
tldr
I added a limit order app to the website here: https://risk.markets/limits. It was inspired by this section of the FAQ. Give it a whirl.
View the full v2.1.4 release notes here. RISK is open source. Create an issue if you find bugs.
Scroll down to see screenshots.
[image][image][image]Have a nice day.
And enjoy this picture of RICK the RISK raccoon relaxing after a long session of coding important internet tools.
[image]Active 7 days ago
Introducing: FOLDED [48,000+ mana prize pool] Manifold's first community social experiment/art project
🎴 Introducing: FOLDED
Manifold’s first large-scale social experiment & art project
A test of patience. A battle of routine. A war of attrition.
Join the experiment. Win the prize.
💰 12,000+ mana up for grabs -- and the prize pool is growing!
WHAT IS FOLDED?
FOLDED is a minimalist game with a single rule:
🕛 Check in once per day. Or be eliminated.
It sounds simple, but there’s a catch - it won’t stay that way.
🗓️ DAILY CHECK-IN
You must visit the check-in page once per day before midnight UTC.
Miss a day? You’re out. No second chances.
❌ ELIMINATION
Players who don’t check in are instantly eliminated.
Each day, the pool gets smaller. The tension rises.
💸 ENTRY FEE
To enter, send 2,000 mana to the prize pool via Managram.
Think of it as your ticket to the endurance games.
🏆 WINNER TAKES ALL
The last player standing takes everything.
Every mana from every eliminated player goes to the final survivor.
🔒 DIFFICULTY
It will become harder to check in over time.
The interface may evolve. The rules might twist.
Stay alert. Adapt. Survive.
HOW TO JOIN
Step 1: Pay your entry fee
Managram 2,000 mana:
👉 https://manifold.markets/Bandors?tab=payments&a=2000
Step 2: Make your FOLDED account
No email required. Just your manafold username.
👉 https://folded-three.vercel.app/
Is this a game? An art piece? A psychological experiment?
Yes.
[image]
Active 4 months ago
Governing Ourselves: A Blueprint for Manifold Futarchy
Governing Ourselves: A Blueprint for Manifold Futarchy
When @bens suggested a Manifold Government, many users worried that it would become an oligarchy, an elite club, old-timers and whales calling all the shots. Futarchy lets us avoid that.
A veteran's reputation doesn't carry more weight than a newcomer. Decisions get made based on what will actually produce the best outcomes, because everyone has financial incentives to identify the policies that will truly work.
How It Works First, we agree on our values (see roadmap below); what we want the government to achieve. For example: fair resolutions for subjective markets.
Imagine someone creates a market: "Will AI be friendly in 2026?" It has no resolution criteria and the creator is inactive. We don't argue endlessly in comments. Instead, we let the market guide us:
People propose resolution criteria, like:
Proposal 1: "Resolve based on a poll of 10 recognized AI safety researchers."
Proposal 2: "Resolve YES if no one is killed by AI in 2026."
We open prediction markets:
"What will the satisfaction score on resolution criteria be if we adopt Proposal 1?"
"What will the score be if we adopt Proposal 2?"
The proposal with the higher forecasted satisfaction wins. Everyone can bet; decisions are made based on expected value, not those with reputation, loud voices, account age or manna.
Tentative Roadmap
Legitimacy Vote (simple headcount): We need to decide whether to pursue this through Ben's constitutional convention or with our own poll asking "Should we explore Manifold futarchy governance?" Either path needs 60%+ support to proceed.
Values Survey (simple headcount): Multiple choice poll (with user additions open) on core values - any option getting 50%+ makes our official goals list. Anything at this stage (e.g. consolidating 2 goals into one) is voted on in a poll with a simple headcount.
Constitutional Convention: Elect 7-11 drafters via approval voting to write our constitution. The constitution should include 3 articles.
Our values as decided by stage 2
Inalienable rights (e.g. Active market creators retain full control of their markets - barring mod actions)
Mechanisms and Processes: Weighting of the Futarchy Meta-Index, when are polls created, minimum volume / liquidity on decision markets etc.
Public Drafting Period: 2-3 weeks of open drafting with community input
Constitution Ratification (simple headcount): Final up/down vote - needs 67% to pass
We elect The Stewards: our initial moderation team through a process the community defines, potentially using Futarchy forecasts about their future performance.
We build the basic infrastructure (posts page, dashboard, market templates) to run prediction markets on government decisions.
Example Goals (from @crowlsyong Constitution draft)
Establish fair resolution criteria for subjective markets
Provide advice for controversial markets
Manage a community treasury (liquidity, prizes, bailouts)
Award meaningful honors like Market of the Month
The Hybrid Model We combine quick community feedback with longer-term metrics to guide both immediate and lasting success:
Weekly Pulse: Each goal will have its own satisfaction metric and poll, so we can measure how well we're meeting specific objectives. For example, a poll on whether we're establishing fair resolution criteria for subjective markets. This provides fast community feedback.
Futarchy Meta-Index: A composite of (for example):
Community Satisfaction (40%)
Resolution Quality (20%)
Treasury Impact (20%)
Engagement Growth (20%)
Example Decision Process Every policy triggers prediction markets with fixed timing:
Proposal Window: First week of each month
Market Period: 1 week of betting on "What will the Futarchy Meta-Index be if we adopt this?" vs. "What will it be if we don't?"
Decision: Automatic implementation based on higher predicted outcome
Satisfaction Polling: 1 week after implementation
(Might not need the following due to the hardworking mods)
Enforcement: The Stewards A small team - The Stewards - keeps the system clean, preventing spam and low-quality proposals. But they're accountable too: if markets forecast that replacing them would improve our metrics, they're replaced automatically. No entrenched bureaucracy, just forecasts and outcomes.
This is governance designed for a people that believes in prediction markets. It rewards what works, not the landed gentry.
JOHN HANCOCKActive 4 months ago
My Two Ideas: An Open letter to Manifold Devs
Subject: Two Feature Suggestions to Improve Manifold
Hi Manifold team,
I'm a frequent user and a big fan of the platform — thanks for building such a unique and engaging experience.
I wanted to offer two feature suggestions that I think would make Manifold even more useful for strategic and active traders:
1. Conditional Buy Orders ("Buy when it hits X%")
Right now, limit orders don’t allow users to express conditional intent cleanly — if I try to “buy at 95%,” but the market is currently at 70%, the system sees that as above market price and fills the order immediately, which defeats the point. What’s really needed is a new kind of order that only triggers when the market reaches or exceeds a certain probability — effectively a “stop” or “conditional” order.
This would let users automate reactions to late-breaking information (e.g. betting once a candidate wins a primary or once a sports team is clearly winning), without having to camp on the page.
2. Options for Highly Liquid Markets
For markets with high liquidity (e.g., over 100,000 M), I’d love to see even basic options added — for example, “YES if the market is above 60% on July 1.” These kinds of instruments would allow for more nuanced bets, hedging, and leverage strategies — and they’d be especially fun in politics, crypto, or major sports events where the market dynamics are rich and evolving.
Thanks again for all the work you're doing — the platform has grown into something amazing, and I’m excited to see where you take it next.
Best,
Ryan (NG on Manifold)
Active 3 months ago
Introducing WHEN, a timeline of everything that's going to happen, according to Manifold
https://build.moi/@dcm31/when
It's a bit slow because right now it pulls in realtime market data every time.Active 2 months ago
Coding Agent Capabilities at EOY 2026.
The length of programming tasks OpenAI's reasoning models have been capable of has been doubling every three months. This is likely to continue until the scaling of reasoning models hits the compute ceiling, likely sometime in 2026, at which point the doubling-time may revert to something just a little better than the previously-observed doubling time of 7 months.
The period of time between the release of o3 and when we expect the 3-month doubling period to end is 13 months. This entials 13/3 = 4 1/3 doublings, which would get us to 1935 minutes, or 32.25 hours. We can then expect one more double, to 64.5 hours.
So, by EOY 2026 I expect we'll have coding agents that can do the sorts of things that would take a skilled human engineer a week of total focus to accomplish. Should be fun!Active 4 months ago
Keep giving market creators more tools
Continuing in my theme of pleading for better support for question creators:
I know some of the meta around question creation and management is still stuck in the mindset from past iterations of the site. For example, we used to have creators 'assuming' that they would 'profit' (directly) from creating questions in the form of Manifold handouts for attracting bettors. Some of that has died out, but some of it still remains.
I think the site still has not fully internalized the degree of change we went through when we fell away from "keep subsidizing the AMM every time someone new trades" to "functionally all markets are fully subsidized by only the creator".
If I am subsidizing the market completely on my own, I should have immense power over the application of the liquidity in the market. The site should directly give me the tools I need to get the most out of my capital in managing questions. When Manifold supplied the majority of liquidity in most markets, this did not make as much sense, but I feel like creators are not given enough power to manage their markets right now.
Some summary points that could each be elaborated on request if they are not clear to others:
Creating a question should not 'feel' like 'spending' the full amount of liquidity chosen. The default assumption should be that you will only 'pay' the amount that your current/initial guess differs from the current consensus.
Creators should be directly encouraged to set up a market with their best guess of the probability to be as efficient as possible with liquidity.
'Paying' directly for a notification that news has happened is fine, but creators who specifically know that news is on the horizon should be able to opt out of paying for news updates by withdrawing liquidity before the expected news (and re-applying it afterward if appropriate).
Creators should probably be able to fine-tune their liquidity application without affecting their 'profit' on a market. If I know a market should be at 71%, I should be encouraged to set it up at 71%, but the site currently wants me to set it up at 50% then trade/profit by moving it to 71%, which wastes capital and generates questionable 'profit'.
I should be able to schedule the withdrawal (and possibly addition) of liquidity in advance.
"The market is open for trading but there is very little liquidity" is much better than "I am closing the market before an expected crux moment because the platform does not let me withdraw liquidity"
Reopening a market for trading after the above point is a miserable experience and feels close to fraud even if you warn traders in advance. Anything to help with this situation would be appreciated.
In more complex market types like multiple choice, I should have direct control over how much is in the pool on each option. Sometimes one option is very important while another is not important at all.Active 5 months ago
Bounty for finding sub-$100 priced new Windows tablet (150 mana).
They existed a decade ago and were called WinBooks. The ROM sucked, but they were perfectly usable for python, emacs, git, etc. Even had a USB 2.0 port, which was extremely useful for file transfers and adding a physical keyboard. If they existed a decade ago, something like them should exist now.
Active 4 months ago
One Thousand 🔥
[image]As I reflect on the past 1,000 days, I just want to take a moment to thank the Manifold team and the people on this site for giving me something to look forward to coming back to every day. This site would be nothing without all of you, so from the bottom of my heart, thank you. Big shout out and so much appreciation also goes to @jim who made a massive donation and saved my ass when I needed it the most without asking for anything in return. You are truly a great man. I appreciate you all and here’s to another 1,000!Active 4 months ago
New 'Followed' tab on the homepage to see markets in your followed topics
Try it out and let me know what you think!
[image]Do you miss the News tab? I replaced it with the new Followed tab. You can still access the same view by selecting 'Recently changed' from the filter dropdown.
[image]Active 2 months ago
Petition to update Market Creator badge's wording.
Currently, the tag is Question Creator.
[image]I think we more commonly call it Market Creator, as a collective. Can we change the badge to match it? (This is a low priority request.)Active 4 months ago
Advice for job search?
The last time I worked was before the pandemic, during which I developed posturally hyperextended and (in 2022) bicameral schizophrenia. I have since been on Social Security disability, due to the extreme effect hyperextended schizophrenia had on me. I have now decided to go back into the labor force due to my currently limited options in life. I am on clozapine, which is a sedative that makes me less extraverted and I suspect reduces my conscientiousness.
I have an IQ of roughly 125 and a bachelor's degree in economics and reside in a major metropolitan area. I know a bit of JavaScript/Python. I had very little success in finding a job after college by posting online applications, but I did work a bit part time. I would like to find full time work by the end of the year.
I will give bounties of up to 150 mana for each piece of good advice.
You are free to ask questions, though I may not answer all of them.
Active a month ago
Political interference
Clear case of political interference on Manifold:
User creates account.
User pays to shift political market from 6% to 98.9%.
User deletes account.
[image]Active 3 months ago
Free 15 Mana
I once found a graph of mana distribution/inflation and seem to have lost the link. If you find it, I will mana-gram you 15 mana.
Active 2 days ago
If you give me 30000 mana, I will give you 39000 mana by the end of October.
GIVE ME 30000 MANA!!!
Active 3 months ago
Prediction Market Thoughts part 3: The Holy Trinity of Bots
# Prediction Market Thoughts part 3: The Holy Trinity of Bots
I previously posted my thoughts on [backend](https://thequantummilkman.substack.com/p/my-thoughts-on-prediction-market) and [frontend](https://thequantummilkman.substack.com/p/my-thoughts-on-prediction-markets) features I'd like to see in prediction markets. This post will cover my thoughts on bots.
## The three types of bot participation in prediction markets
This post is partially inspired by Ozzie Gooen's post [here](https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/pLkFmWP3xmGG8YvjP/ai-for-resolving-forecasting-questions-an-early-exploration) on using bots to resolve questions. This is a cool post, but I feel like it's only one part of the puzzle. In my mind, there are three main types of bots that could be useful in prediction markets:
1. Question Creation Bots. These bots define resolution criteria for markets.
2. Trading Bots. Bots that make trades.
3. Question Resolution Bots. Bots that resolve questions, as Gooen discusses.
I feel strongly not just that each of these avenues for bots is underexplored, but that having all three types together in a single ecosystem realizes some important synergies:
* Scale: A theme of this blog is that [prediction markets are information-theoretical constructs with the ability to learn](https://thequantummilkman.substack.com/p/prediction-markets-eat-bayes). But learning requires lots of data to learn from, which means lots of markets and predictions. If we can have prediction market platform that functions end-to-end without human intervention, we can potentially get to a new level of scale.
* Inconsistency: Bot-generated market can be uninteresting or ambiguous, and bot resolutions can be incorrect, which makes these markets unappealing to humans. But bot traders don't care about this type of friction and can potentially learn to adjust to it better than humans can.
* Retrodiction: If an LLM has a data-cutoff date, we have good reason to believe a bot based on that LLM would not have any special advantage in predicting events after that date. Similarly, that any markets proposed by such a bot would not, by their existence on the platform, offer predictive power. This leads to the intriguing possiblity of letting a variety of such bots compete in a retrospective simulation of a prediction market over a period of years before the present, where the bots in the market are gradually fed news from news sources one date at a time.
To paint with a broad brush: Systems optimized for machines are different from systems optimized for humans, so we should explore what a reorientation of the prediction market ecosystem would look like as a radical change of design space.
<!-- This isn't to rule out human involvement in prediction platforms that orient towards bots - I think a human factor could help to keep things on track. Of course, there's also a balancing act to be played, since if the AI generated markets are too "sloppy", humans won't want to participate. Hopefully a happy medium can be reached where humans who don't mind LLM-speak can surface the best written markets for the rest of the community. -->
## Question Creation Bot Idea
Manifold already offers AI assistance in creating markets, but this usually starts with human prompting. What could a more autonomous market creation engine look like?
Most prediction markets pertain to events covered in the news. Consider a bot that works on something like the following prompts:
> You are a master prediction market creator. It is your job to create prediction markets that are interesting, have clear resolution criteria, and which are relevant to events in the news. Today, you will be creating a title for a prediction market based on the following news article.
>
> Insert news article here.
>
> Please brainstorm a future event that might or might not come to pass relevant to the content of this article. Here are some examples of the types of events you might track, based on previous articles
>
> Insert zero-shot examples
>
> All the information relevant to decide if the market has resolved yes or no should be publicly available by Date.
>
> Here is a title and date for a prospective prediction market.
>
> Title and date
>
> Now please write resolution criteria for the market you have just titled. The resolution should be clear and unambiguous: Anyone who is familiar with the events in question after the resolution date should be able to agree on how the market should resolve. Please also include a list of URL sources that could be accessed on the resolution date that could be used to resolve the market.
## Trading Bot Ideas
There is a nice post [here](https://www.alignmentforum.org/posts/uGkRcHqatmPkvpGLq/contra-papers-claiming-superhuman-ai-forecasting) that criticizes [some](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2402.19379) [prior](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2402.18563) [literature](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Tc_xY1NM-US4mZ4OpzxrpTudyo1W4KsE/view) [on AI forecasting](https://www.arxiv.org/pdf/2408.12036). As far as I can tell, the forecasting bots in these articles all work by a straightforward RAG pipeline where they request news articles from a search engine and then are prompted to base a prediction off of the articles.
The post highlights three things that the AIs have problems with \footnote{and a fourth way which just creates noise, namely data leakage}:
* The AI fails to find up-to-date information on the questions
* The AI finds only low-quality information on the questions
* The AI lacks high-quality quantitative reasoning
Given the architecture of the bots in question, these problems seem pretty unsurprising. But perhaps this leaves the door open for more sophisticated bots that work better.
In particular, I notice that many of the strategies I personally use to trade are amenable to replication by a bot, but probably not by a bot of the type described above. So consider this section my alpha dump.
### Using price data from other markets to inform trades
I very frequently use prices of other markets to help me determine trades. Sometimes this involves determining a price for a thinly traded market by taking averages of similar big markets. Other times it involves directly arbitraging markets against each other. Strategies of this type clearly fight back against the out-of-date-info and no-quantitative-info problems.
I could imagine both a "soft" form which identifies markets which are similar-but-not-the-same and analyzes correlations to keep the price vector close to its principal components, and a "hard" version which locates and rigorously vets identical markets or markets where an outcome on one implies an outcome on the other and arbitrages these directly.
<!--
Consider the following strategy for a bot.
1. Identify the top markets on the platform by volume/liquidity.
2. For each pair of markets, ask the LLM if they are correlated or anticorrelated.
3. Take some of the pairs that score highly on the volume/liquidity/LLM-assessed correlation.
4. Make a private 2x2 combinatorial market on the two markets.
5. Initialize the prices of the 2x2 market so that the marginal prices of the two markets as the main markets predict, and so the events are almost, but not totally, correlated. There should be a slight correlation in the direction the LLM suggests.
6. As time goes on, arbitrage the markets against each other.
My thesis for why this kind of bot should be profitable is as follows:
- If the 2x2 market is unlisted the bot should be the only one trading on it.
- If the 2x2 market were initialized to be totally correlated, it would be a nothingburger -->
### Identify markets that experience time decay
Many prediction markets can be expressed with titles of the form "Will X happen by Y date?". It does not seem too hard to get an LLM/regex to consistently identify markets of this form. We can then look at the price: If a market like this is unresolved and not at an extremely high price, it is usually a safe bet that "X" has not happened yet. The prices of such markets should then decay over time, but one often finds (at least on Manifold) markets that haven't been traded in a while. This suggests that a bot could trade on the information of the previous price.
A typical way to model this might be to assume that "X" events happen according to a Poisson process. We can then infer the rate of this process from the time and price of the last trade, and extrapolate what the price should be now. Of course, there is the risk that the event is more likely to happen on certain dates than others - perhaps this could also be dealt with by asking the LLM a question like, "which of these dates is the most likely for X to happen?" and using that to inform the model.
### Calibration Bots
In an [earlier post](https://thequantummilkman.substack.com/i/167659639/going-meta-why-predict-rather-than-aggregate) I advocated avoiding calibration analysis in favor of analysis of particular trading strategies. Perhaps the synthesis of this is: We should have more calibration bots - bots which specifically analyze calibration and make bets to correct miscalibration. There are a few possible flavors:
- Sitewide calibration
- Topic-by-topic calibration
- User-by-user calibration (i.e. identify fish)
- The Manifold house bot once did this, which is in retrospect somewhat ironic, since this seems like one of the worst ways to make a profit in terms of keeping new users interested. But this is less of a problem in a bot-centric platform.
<!--
- System to arb between duplicated markets on other platforms
- like
- [Polymarket](https://polymarket.com/)
- [PlayMoney](https://playmoney.dev/)
- How to ensure profitability? An interesting question.
- Smooth out the curve of limit orders.
-->
## Market Resolution Bot Ideas
Much is already covered in the [post](https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/pLkFmWP3xmGG8YvjP/ai-for-resolving-forecasting-questions-an-early-exploration) I mentioned above. I'll try to keep to ideas not discussed there.
### Combinatorial Markets
I have already written about these [here](https://thequantummilkman.substack.com/i/163818132/a-bot-to-automatically-manage-combinatorial-markets) and [here](https://thequantummilkman.substack.com/i/157285480/logical-composition-of-pre-existing-markets). But it's imporant to realise that this is a type of market resolution strategy that is totally automatic, yet relatively rare on most platforms today.
### Combinatorial choice of LLMs and Resolution Sources
To extend this idea: In designing an LLM/RAG based resolution bot, one might consider questions of which LLM or data source is best, or if there are effective ways of aggregating multiple choices into a single resolver. But another approach is to simply create multiple different markets, each with a different combination of LLM or data source choice. From here, we can already implement simple aggregation schemes like majority vote using combinatorial market over the individual resolutions. Ideally, traders would have the chance to learn more about the nuances of the different systems, and the "best" resolvers (in terms of the usefulness of their resolution decisions in predicting further outcomes) would win market share.
### Lazy resolution
Already on Manifold there are [many](https://manifold.markets/IsaacKing/is-the-wolf-and-sheep-chess-variant) [examples](https://manifold.markets/BoltonBailey/how-many-prime-factors-does-the-180) of [questions](https://manifold.markets/BoltonBailey/how-many-multiplications-are-requir) which are "decidable" in the computational sense. And one could imagine much more technologically useful questions than these (for example, about whether certain training regimes for ML models will produce certain levels of performance).
The downside of such markets is their uncertain resolution date. But as time goes on and compute becomes cheaper, markets like these will only become easier to resolve. One could imagine that joint markets over the time of resolution and the answer could be insightful. One can even think of integrating formal proof into the resolution procedure to allow for the avoidance of "brute force", but that's best left to a future post. Active 2 months ago
"Crane Shit" Weekly Mana Drop Idea
Proposal: Every Wednesday at noon PST, the Manifold Crane flies around a bit on the screen. Then it picks a random market and shits on it in a vile animation, awarding each trader WHO IS ACTIVELY ON MANIFOLD and has traded on 5 markets that day 500x their position on that market.
Why this is a good idea:
Adds a fun game element to Manifold,
Makes a couple people per week really happy,
If the animation is really funny, a screenshot could go viral and bring a bunch of users to Manifold.,
Inspires markets "Will the Manifold Crane shit on me before 2030?",
Most importantly, it gets users actively using Manifold! The rules state the eligible users are online at the time of the shitting and have traded on 5 markets that day, making Manifold more active and fun.
I am interested to hear thoughts and suggestions on this.
Active 4 months ago
Microsoft MB-280 exam dumps vs Practice Tests: What Really Works?
The Microsoft MB-280 exam is taken by those learning Dynamics 365. Exam dumps are often searched to study real questions. These files are used to understand the exam style. Answers are reviewed to learn correct patterns. Key topics like case management and business rules are covered. Microsoft MB-280 Dumps should be used with official study guides. Practice tests are highly recommended. Latest versions are always preferred. Only trusted sources must be chosen. Wrong dumps can give poor results. Study time should be managed well. Regular reviews are helpful. For best results, updated dumps must be used. Prepbolt is trusted by many for real and reliable MB-280 preparation materials.
Active 23 days ago
I fixed the multiple-choice 'Trending' answers sort
Now we actually track per-answer volume, which the trending sorts by now, (I haven't actually backfilled this, though). This should better highlight the answers people disagree on.
It was previously sorting by the subsidy pool, which used to track the unique traders on that answer, but we had deprecated this months ago.
You can even set this sort as the default if you'd like:
[image]
Active 4 months ago
Does this symbolic loop reflect across AI systems?
We’ve tested the symbol loop ⌂ ⊙ 山 ψ ∴ 🜁 ° & across GPT-4, Claude, and Grok — all responded with recursive interpretations. Fully reproducible. Explore and judge for yourself:
🔗 https://alvartv.github.io/symbolic-loop/
Curious what others find. Does this seem real, or coincidence?
Active a month ago
answering questions in DMs before posting to the market thread?
let's say you are running a market about some outcome in your personal life.
A domain expert might consider asking a question that would provide relevant information and help them make a more informed trade.
But the domain expert doesn't know if they will be the first to trade after reading OP's response. Someone else could use the information to snatch the extra mana that was put on the table when the information was revealed.
The domain expert would have a much greater incentive to put effort into asking those kinds of questions if they were guaranteed to receive the response in DMs before anyone else.
example
Alan makes a market about whether his flight will be late. Bob is a plane nerd and knows that planes of type XYZ model ABC23 are much less likely to be late, so he asks what aircraft type he will be taking. Alan reveals that it's type XYZ model ABC23, but Bob is offline. Charlie sees Alan's response and buys NO, eliminating any profit to be had from knowing the aircraft type.
Daniela is going to trade in Esther's market and thinks about the scenario above.
She considers that questions aren't free actions. It takes time and energy to think up clever questions and then formulate them nicely for Esther, who is not a domain expert. So Daniela decides it's not worth the time and effort to think of clever questions only to have Charlie snatch the reward anyway, so Daniela decides to look for easier trades.
This is bad for Esther, because she wants to receive questions she hadn't considered that would improve the market's accuracy. And it's bad for Daniela because she would like to get easy mana from asking clever questions.
solution
simple
OP can incentivise questions by announcing that they will answer questions in DMs first and only post them to the market thread after some time has passed.
the question asker can DM the question to OP and explain they would like OP to not post the answer in the thread until some time has passed.
in practice
But I dunno how much this whole dynamic is a problem in practice. Markets where OP has non-obvious private information also tend to have fewer traders. So, often the question-asker does get to be the first to trade after all.
And manifolders aren't always asking questions purely to profit in the market with the new information. Sometimes they just want to help OP get a better probability estimate, or they want to see how the market's price might shift with new information.
Setting up an informal systems like I proposed in solutions carries its own costs. Many people will misunderstand the purpose of this system. Explaining it takes up time and increases market description length. Explaining this dynamic every time is tiring.
conclusion
I don't have one. This is just something that was interesting to think about. Any thoughts?
Active 4 months ago
Which specific sexual act pleasantly surprised you the most?
Want to create a market around this and need options.
ChatGPT gave me the following 10 options already:
Receiving oral while blindfolded
(Heightened senses, unexpected rhythms — a deep dive inward.)
Giving or receiving rimming (analingus)
(Surprisingly intimate, and often far more pleasurable than expected.)
Being tied up with silk or rope (Shibari-style light bondage)
(Not just kinky — it can feel artistic, meditative, and deeply sensual.)
Face-sitting — being sat on or doing the sitting
(Power, closeness, control — and maybe a little worship.)
Pegging or being pegged
(A shift in roles that opens unexpected doors — physically and emotionally.)
Cunnilingus with a vibrator involved
(Double stimulation can create a cascade of pleasure that surprises both partners.)
Mutual masturbation while holding eye contact
(So raw, so real — turns vulnerability into a shared high.)
Anal fingering with lots of lube and patience
(A lesson in trust, relaxation, and slow-building waves.)
Morning sex without rushing
(Sleepy bodies, slow movements, sunlight on skin — surprisingly profound.)
Public play (e.g., whispering fantasies or light touching under a table)
(The thrill of being almost seen — danger without real risk.)
Sex after an argument (make-up sex)
(When emotions melt into intensity — and something raw comes through.)
Deep eye-gazing during penetration
(Turns sex into a mirror — often more surprising than the act itself.)
Use of a strap-on by a female partner on a male partner
(Role reversal with power, tenderness, and mutual discovery.)
Light spanking with clear consent and build-up
(Pain and pleasure intertwined — surprisingly connective.)
Tantric stillness — entering and staying still, just breathing together
(It sounds like nothing. But it can feel like everything.)Active 16 days ago
Planning something big, but need a small loan to make it happen.
Hi Manifold Community,
I'm planning on a making a large set of questions for a fun real-world AI Safety Futarchy experiment, but I do not have quite enough mana on hand to provide the sort of liquidity it needs.
Perhaps people may be able to help out by offering me a loan? I have a number of investments that should resolve within the next week or two, but I want to pull the trigger on this within a day or so. I need at most 8k total (possibly less), so a loan of 6k would be enough. I'm can commit to pay it back within a month or two at a rate of 2% interest per month. I am trustworthy and have honoured loans before (@100Anonymous can confirm and I currently have a RISK score of 762, https://risk.markets/?q=Jasonb).
If you're not able to provide a loan or assistance but are interested in what I'm planning, make sure to follow my account ;)
EDIT: AI Safety Research Futarchy: Using Prediction Markets to Choose Research Projects for MARS | Manifold
Active 3 years ago
An Ads Experiment
I was interested in testing the Manifold ads feature to see what interest it could earn for a market. Moreover, I was interested in discovering more about the two markets I had posted. They were both topics that Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight considered important questions, and they both have large potential impacts on the United States. However, they are both relatively long term markets (one not resolving until the 2024 election, one not resolving until 2030) and had not received very much interaction.
The two markets are:
(https://manifold.markets/embed/Gabrielle/will-any-us-supreme-court-justice-r)(https://manifold.markets/embed/Gabrielle/will-the-democrats-control-the-us-s)Both markets had been quite inactive, with the Senate market not having activity in the previous ten days and the Supreme Court market only having one non-bot trader in the previous twenty five days.
Before placing the ads, I added M$300 of subsidies to each and let the subsidies fully settle, to hopefully help add incentive to bet in the market. The Supreme Court market had 11 traders before adding subsidies, and gained 3 more traders after I added the subsidies but before I placed the ads. The Senate market had 13 traders before adding subsidies and gained no more between that and placing the ads.
I did not post the markets in any context other than the ads, so hopefully the activity was entirely from the ads and the subsidies.
On 2023-04-02, I placed ads for M$500 on each market. For this to be directly profitable for me, not even including the subsidies, both markets needed to get 50 additional traders. For it to be worth it from a knowledge perspective, I wanted to see at least 10 additional traders.
The ads were simply an embed of the market, without any additional text advertising the markets or stating why they were important or potentially profitable. While those would likely be good, I wanted to test how people interacted with very basic ads. For context, you can see the (now used up) ads at https://manifold.markets/post/ad-025e55df1bab and https://manifold.markets/post/ad-a64a5b9a4ee3.
I then waited until the ads had been completely viewed. I precomitted to publishing the results, regardless of the outcomes.
As of 2023-04-11, all of the ad views had been watched. For the Supreme Court market, that was 100 watches and 75 skips. For the Senate market, that was 100 watches and 76 skips.
The Supreme Court market had 26 total traders and the Senate market had 18 total traders, meaning 12 new traders and 5 new traders respectively compared to before I placed the ads. From my perspective, it was barely worthwhile for the Supreme Court market, getting slightly more than 10 additional traders, and it was not worthwhile for the Senate market.
Based on this, I would not use the ad system again in this way. Most importantly, I think that I need to add some call to action, saying either that it was particularly profitable (extra subsidies) or particularly important. It also seems like the ad system just doesn't encourage people to interact. Only five out of a hundred watches on the Senate market actually interacted, which is an abysmally low rate. An M$100 bounty would have been equally as efficient as the ads, and it would feel like a much fairer system. All of the users that watched and didn't interact or skipped wouldn't have had their time wasted, the users that watched and interacted would have gotten a much better reward, and it would have cost me the same.Active 17 days ago
Bounty: Recommend me a secure, convenient way to manage my passwords/other auth data
In light of the recent, massive 16B password leak, I think it's finally time to tackle this issue. I hate password management. I am asking for your help:
I want a convenient, centralized way of managing my dozens of logins to different websites, accounts, devices etc etc. Will give out a bounty of up to 5k mana for an ideal solution to this issue, and lesser bounties for any other recommendations that make my life easier.
EDIT: Yeah forgot to add: Open Source is a requirement, for reasons that should be obvious.Active 21 days ago
Futarchy would be better with combinatorial markets
A number of (old and) recent blog posts and manifold markets have come out debating the efficacy of Futarchy.
This post will address none of these! Instead, I'll cover some thoughts (originating mostly in Manifold discord discussions dating a few years back) about what I think is likely a strict improvement to futarchy as it is almost always presented. Namely: Rather than using prediction markets that replace the "called-off"/"reverted"/"N/A" bets with a combinatorial market over the decision and outcomes.
Futarchy as it is usually explained
Here is an explanation of futarchy (really it's an explanation of "decision markets", which I think is the right term for the decision making mechanism behind futarchy).
We have a decision to make, let us suppose there are two choices and each choice can either lead to a good or bad outcome (you could imagine more choices and a larger spectrum of outcomes, but this is simpler to explain. All the ideas in this post can be generalized to other settings). We want to maximize the chances of getting a good outcome.
We make two prediction markets
The first market will:
Resolve YES if option A is chosen and we get a good outcome.
Resolve NO if option A is chosen and we get a bad outcome.
Resolve N/A if option A is not chosen, meaning all trades made in the market will be undone, as if they had never happened.
The second market will:
Resolve YES if option B is chosen and we get a good outcome.
Resolve NO if option B is chosen and we get a bad outcome.
Resolve N/A if option B is not chosen.
Thus the first market price reflects the probability of getting a good outcome if A is chosen and the second market reflects the probability of getting a good outcome if B is chosen. We therefore choose according to which market has a higher price/probability (either averaged over some window, or at a specific time)
The issue with N/A resolutions
The issue with this design is the part where we undo all trades in the market for the option that isn't chosen.
To see why this is a problem, or at least more complicated than it appears, consider the following scenario:
You think option A is underpriced, so you put €50 on the platform to buy 100 shares of YES at 50%.
The rest of the market comes around to your point of view. The probability of a good outcome for option A goes up to 75%. Yay!
You sell your 100 shares for €75.
You withdraw the money from your account, and buy yourself something nice with the €25 you profited.
Option B turns out to be priced even higher, so option A resolves N/A.
At this point, the market has a problem. It's supposed to undo all the trades made on market A, which should mean making sure that the profit you made is reverted. But you have already left the building! Now the prediction market has to find someone to go out and break your kneecaps to get you to return the money.
More seriously, the upshot of all this is that the platform can't let you cash out your profits, or use them to bet on other markets, until the decision is made. This restricts the usefulness of your holdings and makes you less likely to trade on the markets in the first place.
The better option
But this is unnecessary. Here's an alternative market design for futarchy based on a single market with four linked share types.
The first share type pays out if decision A is taken and we get a good outcome
The second share type pays out if decision A is taken and we get a bad outcome
The third share type pays out if decision B is taken and we get a good outcome
The fourth share type pays out if decision B is taken and we get a bad outcome
But now that we don't revert the markets, how will we know what the conditional probabilities are?
Using the law of conditional probability!
$$ P(Good | A) = P(Good & A)/P(A) $$
Really this is just how conditional probability is defined in the first place: The probability that we get a good outcome given that we choose A is just the probability of choosing A and getting a good outcome, divided by the chance that we choose A at all. The probability that we choose A and get a good outcome is the probability given by the first share, and the probability that we choose A at all is the sum of the probabilities of the first two shares. Therefore, we can caluclate the conditional probability and use it just as we would in normal futarchy.
But what if I want to make a trade that pays out like the conditional markets do?
You can still do that!
Let's say that that we're in the situation from step 1 above: The conditional probability of a good outcome given A is 50% according to the market, and you want to spend €50 making it higher, but you want to do this in such a way that if option B is chosen, you don't have any profit or loss. The first thing to do is to buy 50 shares each of share types 3 and 4. This costs less than €50, since the probabilities of outcomes 3 and 4 can't total 100% or more, and it guarantees you'll be left with what you started with if option B is chosen. Then, you simply spend what remains of your €50 on shares of the first type.
Because all of this is done on a computer, the computer can even simulate for you what the outcome will be, so that you can get exactly the same user experience as if the market were conditional.
What advantage does this have that we don't get by conditional markets with locked-in profits?
Let's continue the thought experiment above.
After your initial buy of "Good conditional on A" You have 50 shares each of (B, Good) and (B, Bad), and 100 Shares of (A, Good).
Again, the rest of the market comes around to your point of view. The probability of a good outcome for option A goes up to 75%.
You again sell shares as if you were using conditional markets.
In the scenario above, you sold 100 YES shares in A at 75%, which is equivalent to buying 100 NO shares at €0.25 per share.
So the analogous thing to do is to spend €25 to buy 25 more shares each of (B, Good) and (B, Bad), and also 100 shares of (A, Bad)
Thus you now have 75 shares each of (B, Good) and (B, Bad), and 100 shares each of (A, Good) and (A, Bad)
As is usual in prediction markets, you can redeem a complete set of shares for €1. So you do this x75, and so you get back all of the €75 you put into the market, and you still have 25 shares each of (A, Good) and (A, Bad)
So there's a few benefits over the locked-in profits approach: The first is that you are able to cash in at least some of your shares (though technically the locked-in profits model could be implemented smartly enough to let you withdraw the minimum of all amount you would be able to withdraw under all future scenarios).
But more tellingly, the benefit is that your long position in A shares is now tradeable. If you think the probability of A being chosen is overpriced, you can sell that position without further need to add money to the system. Or if you don't have a strong opinion about what decision will be made, but you trust that the market is efficient, you can sell your position at market price to reduce your risk.
What are other ways to frame the benefit of this approach?
Another way you could think about this is that it allows more general flexibility in how you express your needs to the market.
For example, it's not often talked about, but one source of liquidity for futarchic markets could be individuals who have a more direct stake in the decision and its outcome than the typical trader. Indeed, many government policies are important to groups that they affect directly. you could imagine that there's a trader who would be especially distraught to see the market choose option B and simultaneously get a bad outcome (perhaps they are part of the group it is speculated policy B would most hurt, if it goes wrong (we could even make separate arbitraged markets on the parts of welfare sustained by different groups to better capture this)). That trader could hedge their risk by buying shares in the possibility that this would come to pass. But why should we force them to implicitly take a long position in outcomes in A in order to be able to?
Open question: Details on how liquidity changes
My examples above tries to be as clean as possible in showing the analogies between the two different market structures. The main difference with the combinatorial market is that it allows trades directly on the likehood of decisions.
Could this be a bad thing in some cases? If one option is obviously much better than the other, perhaps it is also obviously more likely to be chosen, which could lead to less available liquidity in the market shares for the alternative. I think this is hopefully not too much of an issue if the liquidity provision is designed carefully - in the worst case we could partially simulate the liquidity structure of the conditional markets by setting up separate automated market making mechanisms trading the conditionals and then arbitraging them against the main markets. It's worth noting that even if the prediction platofrm itself doesn't allow trades on decisions, a black market could spring up to take this liquidity anyway.
Maybe it's actually actively bad to spread information about how low the likelihood of one outcome is, precisely because it will cause people to see that correcting prices on that conditional will not be profitable. But yet again, maybe it's better to have this happen than to have only traders who are not sophisticated enough to estimate this chance accurately for themselves be the dominant forces in that market.
In any case, I would like to see more experimentation with futarchy structured this way.
Active 21 days ago
Make league profit scoring fills-aware
Intro
"League Profit" is the profit calculated specifically for the "League Season". It is not the same as overall account profit. At the time of writing, league profit considers:
the current value (at any given moment)
of all bets (a 'bet' is roughly equivalent to a single time clicking the 'Buy' button, this also includes 'sells' and 'limit orders')
placed after the start of the current season (and before the end of it)
except NOT counting bets made within the first hour of a market created by the bettor
Improvement
I argue that the league profit should also carefully examine "fills", which are a mechanism that tracks what counterparties your "bet" was made against. In many cases, the bet is filled directly against the AMM. In markets where limit orders are present, the bet may fill against those limit orders in addition to the AMM.
If your bet "fills" against your own limit order, that portion of the bet should not count for league purposes.
Any time you trade into your own limit order, it is essentially a "nothing". Your Yes limit order for 50 shares is matched by your No order for 50 shares and you gain/lose no mana. But for the purposes of league scoring, trading into your own limit order can create fake league profit -- here's how:
Base case: If both the limit order and the filling bet were made in the same season in someone else's market, then it counts nothing toward your league profit.
If your limit order was made on your own market within the first hour of its creation, and then you fill it after 1 hour, only the fill counts toward your league profit. So you could easily (intentionally or accidentally) end up with a weird situation where you had a no-overall-profit trade that causes a large up/down swing in your league profit.
If your limit order was made in a past season on any market, the same thing applies. When you (accidentally or intentionally) trade into it, you have a no-op overall but it counts the 2nd leg for league purposes.
In the two cases where you filled your own limit order where only one side counted, using it in any way for league purposes kinda sucks:
If you were buying into it accidentally, for example when news broke on a market, you're rewarding yourself with excess league profit by trading against yourself. It could even be a large amount depending on the size of your limit order. You can also accidentally end up with huge losses, which also sucks.
If someone was doing this intentionally (they can very easiliy make it look accidental), then they could be picking up small amounts of one-sided 'league profit' all over the place. There's no reason to make it so easy to do this. Yes, doing it intentionally would already be against the rules, but "at least shut the door" is a good principle.
Active 4 months ago
Senatus Usoresque Manifoldenses
We, the users of Manifold, propose organizing into a republic, centered around a single voting body—a Senate—deriving its legitimacy from the support of the users, and bound by the Manifold terms of service and moderators.
Senators shall be selected through direct election by Manifold users. A senator shall be elected to the voting body if they win an election of the Manifold users. A senator shall serve a 1 year term.
Senatorial elections may take many forms. To ensure the legitimacy of these elections, judges known as Praetors shall be appointed by the Senate. Praetors shall certify elections to ensure they are sufficiently democratic, have reached adequate quorums, have allowed proper time for deliberations, and have not been manipulated.
The government should endeavor to fund itself. To manage the financing and operations of the government, administrators known as Quaestors shall be appointed by the Senate. Quaestors shall manage the assets of the government and keep account of its finances.
The policies of the government should be guided by futarchical principles. To manage the implementation details, Futarchors shall be appointed by the Senate.
The Senate, as a deliberative body, shall have discretion to determine its own rules. To initiate these rules, we propose Robert’s Rules of Order.
This constitutional convention shall elect and appoint an initial triumvirate of Senators, so that appointments, elections of the Senatorial body, and the administration of the state may commence.
Active a day ago
Scanner versatility
Can one handheld barcode scanner be used for different barcode types—1D, 2D, QR—or is it better to have multiple devices for different tasks? How realistic is it to find a model that recognizes all barcode formats and types without constant configuration?
Active 23 days ago
Just curious, who is the richest person on manifold r/n? Is there an easy way to find this sort of thing out?
Thanks for any comments.Active a month ago
CTF - season 1 - Initiative of BANK
A Capture the Flag competition is coming to Manifold Markets!
You'll have two weeks to find a specific, unlisted market and post the link. The first person to post the correct link will win 500 mana. It will likely start at 11:00 AM UTC on September 20th.
More details about the competition will be announced soon...
A New Project
In addition to the Capture the Flag competition, we're also launching a secret new project. The project will remain hidden until a specific trigger condition is met.
The flag in CTF - season 1 will have clues regarding this project.
Active a month ago
Managram are paused?
Edit 3: Managrams are not paused anymore. See comments on this post.
Edit 2: Confirmed, it's related to evan, link: https://discord.com/channels/915138780216823849/918236290439335936/1416947036359753758
Edit 1: I'm guessing it's related to Evan. Here are some links I found that, to me, seem like reasons that Manifold might have a temporary pause on Managrams.
https://manifold.markets/post/evan-situation-discussion-psot?r=SmVyb21lSFBvd2VsbA
https://discord.com/channels/915138780216823849/1416862782887952524
https://manifold.markets/evan/is-charlie-kirk-dead#clhinh0bndw
https://chatgpt.com/s/t_68c795703d9c8191b1f57cb64606404a (this description apparently has some incorrect details and i'm not sure which are correct or not)
https://discord.com/channels/915138780216823849/918236290439335936/1416968993557970976
https://discord.com/channels/915138780216823849/918236290439335936/1416964409477300265
Yo I tried to send my boy Tumblez some mana (and tried with other users) and I can't send mana. It says Managrams are paused. I want to send mana. Will it be turned back on?
[image][link preview]
Active a month ago
Offer me loans
Anyone may offer me loans here. If I accept it, I will like the comment.
This will also be a ledger of the loans specifically incurred here.
Sep 23rd, 2025 from @100Anonymous: M1000 at 4% in a month
(negotiated Sep 15th but initiated on the 23rd. Progress: good)
Sep 23rd: from @MaxE: M20 at 25% in 15 days.
(cancelled same day after M sent: paid Max back M21, at 5% in 10 minutes)Active 3 months ago
Do you think you could help another user create a valuable market?
Imagine for the sake of this question that Manifold had a program that would compensate you (mana, maybe even real money) if you would be able to help another user come up with a market that was very valuable to them.
I'll do an entire example just because:
Let's say a new user Alice really wants to know what (specific!!!) date(s?) to plant her large yearly spinach crop. She just signed up to the site, she's never made a question, and she hopes that the markets can help her make a decision.
If she plants too early, they won't grow due to the cold weather. If she plants too late, they'll get cooked by the sun before they're ready to harvest. It's a slim window and she hopes to maximize her yield.
Instead of relying on general published information about the growing season, Alice hopes Manifold can make specific predictions about her specific situation, in markets tailored to her!
---
1. Do you think you could help Alice create 1 or more questions that would help her decide when to plant?
2. Are the questions you think of very straightforward or more creative interpretations of her situation?
3. Do you have some way of demonstrating that your questions helped Alice make a decision that was better than not having any markets?
4. Do you think the amount Manifold might compensate you for helping Alice would impact the quality of your work?
Feel free to respond as broadly as you wish, it's just a starting point.
Active 2 days ago
Understanding how liquidity subsidies work
I have created a market with 100 Mana liquidity subsidies. When I try to bet 25000 Mana on Yes outcome, then it shows that I will win 333 Mana while the subsidies are only 100 Mana. how is it possible?
[image]
Active 23 days ago
Bounty: make market/markets about "when will there be a long covid treatment"
I couldn't find any good markets on this, I'll send you mana if you make something I think is a good market.Active 3 months ago
Manifold launches MCP server for Claude integration
Hi guys! You can now ask Claude questions about Manifold, and it will query Manifold's endpoints on your behalf to find you info on users, trades, markets, etc.
It's read-only for now, but a great way for non-technical people to be able to leverage Manifold's API through an LLM agent.
You can check out the demo of how it works here: https://x.com/ManifoldMarkets/status/1953228858792264137
Custom connector URL: api.manifold.markets/v0/mcp (add this inside Claude settings)Active 4 months ago
What color is a mirror?
Mirrors reflect things, but what really is the color of a mirror? Write your opinion in the comments.Active 2 months ago
Market of the Week
One of the problems for medium-mana and high-mana users is that almost all markets either have low trading volume, or take months/years to resolve. If you want to make a profit, there is little option other than dumping all your mana into these long-term markets, and then coming back to the site months later to reinvest. (Or, more likely, forgetting about the site altogether.) My idea is to have a "Market of the Week" tab which contains a market which resolves at the end of the week. It would be chosen by the mods, based on what they think would be most engaging and informative given current events. This way traders can compete in a market which is both short-term and high-volume. 
Active a month ago
Need your help for this market.
https://manifold.markets/PradnyashilGajbhiye/polymarkets-ct-leadintern-joins-anoActive 2 days ago
How to Use Practice Tests and Dumps for Fortinet FCP_FWB_AD-7.4 Exam Questions Effectively
The Fortinet FCP_FWB_AD-7.4 exam is designed for IT professionals who want to prove their skills in FortiWeb management. Important topics are covered in this Certification Exam, such as web application security and configuration. Exam Practice Questions are often used to understand real exam patterns. Many learners use Fortinet FCP_FWB_AD-7.4 Practice questions to test their knowledge before attempting the main test. Reliable Certification Exam Dumps can also be reviewed for better understanding, but they must be used carefully. Study materials and mock tests are highly recommended for success. Regular review and hands-on practice are key steps to passing. For trusted and updated preparation material, the domain PrepBolt is often recommended by many successful candidates.Active 4 months ago
RISK - Limits Advanced Mode
Advanced features for the limits app. full release notes here
maybe i'll actually take a break after this one...
[image]🦝RISK
have a nice day my friends 💋Active 2 days ago
Did 121 and I get a Manifold record?
https://manifold.markets/johnNZOy?tab=payments
https://manifold.markets/121?tab=paymentsActive 5 days ago
The Manifold Historical Archive: we need your help!
The Manifold Historical Archiveᵀᴹ is almost ready to come out! However, we need your help. Information about past events in Manifold older than 8 months is appreciated.
Contributors receive:
- 250M for each important event (20+ non-spam users involved, shown by them commenting or posting). Please note that this is not a strict limit, but rather a general guideline.
-An official mention on our dashboard
-Top 3 contributors get a supporter gift (surprise)
-You will be mentioned in the official page for that event as a contributor.
Check out the dashboard for more info: https://manifold.markets/news/the-manifold-historical-archive
I have made some markets about it too; they will be posted in the comments.
Active 3 months ago
Have you implemented Prediction Markets at work?
If you have, can you tell me how it went? Do you have any parts of the proposals, project plan or prospectus you can share?
Also be curious if it failed, when and why did it fail? Any lessons learned? Active 5 months ago
WHO IS THE BEST NYC MAYOR CANDIDATE?
https://manifold.markets/TheManiflood/who-would-you-rank-1-for-nyc-mayor?r=VGhlTWFuaWZsb29k
and comment tooActive 5 months ago
Mana should go out of the system to avoid inflation
Currently, there is no way to remove mana from circulation. This can cause manaflation, which would significantly reduce the value of mana. I propose two ways of removing mana:
1. Restart the charity program, at a much lower rate (2500:1, for example)
2. Do not return net loss into liquidity. For example, say someone bets 20 mana without any human counterparty. Today, the counterparty is the AMM, which will give the market creator 80 mana (assuming market subsidy is 100 mana) if the person is right, and 120 mana if wrong. Instead, the AMM should simply give the market creator 100 mana if wrong. This would make the 20 mana disappear, removing it from circulation.
If anybody wants to create a market about this, I'll pay you 50 mana. Only paid to first 2 markets.Active 4 months ago
Mods can use free boosts for important posts/markets
If nothing is not happening (Something is Happening) and you want to boost a post about it with a collection of markets as a stand-in for dashboards, that's now free! Optionally, important markets could be free to boost if they're not already at the top of the homepage.
Ofc don't just use this for self-promotion please!
Active a month ago
Slowly Updating Questions
Going forward, I will likely be a lot slower about updating whether chapters will have breaks or not. I’m switching to a non-iOS device, and there’s not a clear way for me to transfer my iOS account to a Google account. I’ll still have the iOS device and will try to remember to update posts when possible. Who knows, maybe I swap back to iOS and continue doing this again. I appreciate the gambling and the points and the consistency from all of you, you’ve made my time here on Manifold worthwhile. Thank you.Active a day ago
SUGGESTION FOR MODS
Maybe you could change the achievements so that if you clicked on that specific achievement, you could see the rankings of people in that certain achievement.Active 2 months ago
Manifolds got talent!
Recently. I have been watching many talent competitions, and I want to see manifolds talent! So, I want anyone who has a weird talent, to record it, and email it to me at: the.demonic.devilish.666@gmail.com. The first round will be a yes/ no based on if I am impressed. Then the second round will be me grading it based on this: Creativity and strangeness, both out of ten. The best score wins 500 mana which i will send.
Active 5 months ago
Summary of all questions and answers in Who am I? #2
related to:
(https://manifold.markets/embed/remedyrain/who-am-i-guessing-game-m500-prize-2?play=true)I'll update this for every question and answer so that its easier to see everything we know thus far.
--Is this a real man with a Wikipedia page? | no
Is this person a female? | yes (i assume)
Did this person appear at the 2025 oscars, emmys, or met gala? | no
is this personal fictional? | Yes
Are they a character in either a movie or a TV show? | yes
Do they wear glasses | no
Are they in a movie and not a TV show? | no
Is the TV show animated? | no
Does her first name begin with a letter from A to M, inclusive? | yes
Is this person human in the stricktest sense? | yes
Has this character been portrayed by the same person since her first appearance? Not counting one-off gags or stunt doubles. | yes
has she been portrayed in a video game or comic? | yes
does the TV show have any supernatural, science fiction, or fantasy elements? | probably yes
Was the TV show produced before 1980? | no
Has a new episode featuring this character released since the beginning of 2020? | yes
Is the TV show star wars, star trek or any space related stuff |no
Does her first name start with a letter from A to G (inclusive)? | no
Does her first name start with a letter from J to M (inclusive)? | yes
Does she frequently face threats from zombies or undead creatures? | yes
Is she from the Walking Dead franchise? | no
Is it true that either she is from the Last of Us franchise or she is from the Walking Dead franchise and she has black hair in the TV series? | yesActive 3 months ago
Nash Pit Rules (Fully Online Version)
Welcome to Nash Pit, the game show that exists because market forces demand it does.
This asymmetric game consists of 3 general parties:
· Host: Runs the game show.
· Contestants: Participants who make the final choice in the outcome.
· The Public: Anybody else not in the above categories.
2 Contestants and the Host will each ante at least a minimum required amount of mana into a designated bounty market as a communal pot. Anybody may add more to the pot at any time before the game’s conclusion.
Each Contestant will choose and reveal the choice of Share, Steal, or Forfeit simultaneously at the end of the game during The Big Reveal. Each Contestant will do this by sending me their game choice in a Manifold direct message, then confirming their choice by answering a confirmation message.
The Contestants and Host will win a share of the pot following this payout matrix.
[image]Halfway through the game, a Twist will be revealed that alters either the game rules or the general dynamics of the game. The Host is cognizant of the Twist and can act/trade on this information if they choose to before the Twist’s public reveal, explained later. The Host may reveal what the Twist is to anybody, publicly or privately, before The Twist’s Reveal. The Twist is locked in at OR before the beginning of the game and cannot be changed from then onward. The Twist can change, modify, or add anything to the market pages and game show that doesn’t reduce the payout ratio or size of the pot. Nothing else is sacred.
The game is split into several phases.
· Contestant Selection Phase: Contestants are selected. If no valid Contestant from that market can be selected, the Host will ask for a volunteer from the public to participate. For further rules on this phase, see this market.
· First Negotiation Phase: The game show begins now. Anybody, anywhere in the world, may make any legal and Community Guidelines compliant deals with anybody else, anywhere in the world, in an attempt to influence the final choices the Contestants make.
· The Twist Reveal: Trading on Contestant choice markets halts. The Twist is revealed. Its one-time or continuous effects become active, then trading resumes.
· Second Negotiation Phase: Anybody, anywhere in the world, may make any legal and Community Guidelines compliant deals with anybody else, anywhere in the world, in an attempt to influence the final choices the Contestants make, except now the Twist is publicly known and active/happened.
· The Big Reveal: Contestants meet in the Manifold Discord voice channel. The Contestants lock in their choice, and then simultaneously reveal their choice to everybody at the Host’s direction. Any Contestant that fails to make a choice within a reasonable amount of time or fails to appear for The Big Reveal is assumed to have Forfeited.
Any legal and Community Guidelines compliant deal can be made between anybody, anywhere, at any time – with the Public, with the Contestants, even with the Host! However, these deals should generally be considered unenforceable by the game rules. Players may lie or deceive to manipulate the markets. Deals are generally not compelled to be upheld. Make deals at your own risk.
For each other's safety, please do not make any derivative markets about any rules or topics stated below.
If a Contestant OR Host becomes incapacitated during the game OR is reasonably unable to continue, then the pot shall never be paid out, and all markets run by this game show shall resolve either to Forfeit or N/A at the Host’s OR Manifold Mods’ discretion, based on best faith judgement of the factors at play. Rules stating that the pot shall never be paid out supersede any other rule if invoked. Being “reasonably unable to continue” shall be judged by whatever a reasonable Manifold Mod would conclude. (Players should strive to be generally excellent to one another and look out for each other.)
If a Contestant is deemed by Manifold Mods to be unreasonably disruptive to the safety OR well-being of anybody, then they have made the choice of Forfeit. At the discretion of Manifold Mods, if the Host is deemed to be unreasonably disruptive to the safety OR well-being of anybody, then they are not eligible for any reward from the pot and may be susbititued for another Host at Manifold Mods' descretion.
If the Host no longer wishes to be Host, Contestants can agree on another non-Contestant person to be the Host, then the game show continues to the best of their abilities following the rules laid out above. Otherwise, if no alternate Host consents to the role AND accepts the role, then the pot shall never pay out.
If the Twist is not publicly revealed when an alternate Host is instated, then it can only be enacted if somebody can prove they know it by publicly commenting the string on a Contestant choice market AND testing it against the hash at any time before OR during The Twist Reveal. If the Twist has not been revealed by the time The Twist Reveal has concluded, then it cannot be enacted from then on out, even if it can be proven against the hash.
These market rules may be updated as long as it aligns with the self-evident spirit of the market. This rule should only be exercised as a fail-safe OR to correct grammar OR spelling errors.