"(My first comment on Arbital. Hopefully it cont..."


by Ted Sanders Dec 29 2016 updated Dec 29 2016

(My first comment on Arbital. Hopefully it contributes.)

As someone who has traded on prediction markets for years, I agree with the sentiment.

Unfortunately, this claim itself seems really ambiguous. I voted neutral because I'm having a difficult time evaluating what the claim means. I appreciate the attempted clarification of 'at least 30% more valuable to people sharing models', but it leaves me confused. How is value measured? How would I be able to distinguish 20% more valuable from 40% more valuable? And who are these people sharing models? When and where are they doing their sharing?

I think we all agree that language will always have some wiggle room for uncertainty and interpretation. But in this particular case, I have no idea how to distinguish worlds where this statement is true from worlds where this statement is false. That's why I voted neutral.

I wish I could give a more constructive suggestion of how this claim could be reworded. I've spent a few minutes thinking about it but I don't have anything great. If anything, I'd remove the first asterisk.