Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Ross Shuel
@shuel.eth
is it more correct to view an efficient prediction market as a mechanism to provide accurate probabilities for outcomes, rather than predicting binary outcomes? e.g. prediction markets correctly assigned Trump a <50% probability of winning the 2016 election.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Ross Shuel
@shuel.eth
And if so, what is the implication for conditional markets i.e. futarchy? @nicovrg
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
nicovrg (fut/acc)
@nicovrg
to me prediction markets have an evaluation "resolution" that reward people who were right whereas conditional market protect holders & allow them to express their desire depending of proposal result example ->
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
Ross Shuel
@shuel.eth
Hmm. This makes sense but doesn’t answer the question I’m trying to articulate Another way stating this: should we expect conditional markets to “get it wrong” some % of the time? If so, is there a correlation between the pass v. fail market prices and the probability the “worse” proposal passes
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
nicovrg (fut/acc)
@nicovrg
there might be some keynesian beauty contest in the sense that people trading conditional markets try to predict what other traders are going to trade. you can think that a proposal is -ev (should bid fail) and bid pass because you assume other traders will view it as +ev or do the same assumption as you
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
nicovrg (fut/acc)
@nicovrg
its not always (more often than not) possible to know what would have happened if the other market would have passed since you that reality didn't materialise. its also hard to isolate impact of different proposal on the token price months away from now. which is responsible for what?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction