domain:x.com
ThenElection
23m ago
There is no new information. We have no reason to think his model is even particularly good. The only thing that it really brings to the table is that he both has a consistent reasonable process that doesn't give much room for human bias to creep in, and that he doesn't abandon it the second it makes partisans mad. This is, apparently, a really hard thing to do.
Or, a bit more optimistically: it actually does provide information that can be new to people. E.g., post-debate the model showed that Biden was going to get walloped because voters just weren't willing to re-elect someone senile, while many Democrats were doing their best to convince themselves otherwise. It's somewhat fair to say, "oh, so all the model does is tell you things that are blindingly obvious?" Yes, with a significant caveat: seeing what's in front of your eyes is a very difficult thing in politics.
TheFooder
27m ago
Couldn't we also find this stuff on the moon? Why not the moon? I would presume every crater has something interesting at its center. It just seems like the most obvious place to start but I rarely see it mentioned or discussed.
I'm not super up-to-date on all the latest space exploration talk, so maybe someone can give me the tl;dr.
Turbulent_Singularity
36m ago
I have plenty of reasons for against my ADHD diagnosis, so I think it's easier if I list it in a roughly chronological order
-
I only really considered that I might have ADHD after a streamer said they had it, got medicated and then was way more productive and focused. They described it in a way that felt like it could apply to me. Points for: this made me seriously consider ADHD Points against: am I just being influenced into thinking I have ADHD like all those patients that news articles and doctors on the psychiatry subreddit complain about? Am I just another one of those self-diagnosed tiktok people?
-
I did a lot of research on ADHD prior to going to a therapist Points for: A lot of the questionnaires I did said I had ADHD (I looked for official, actually used questionnaires, not shoddy websites) Points against: not every questionnaire said I had ADHD and when it did say I had it, more often than not I was barely within the ADHD range. Also, am I just Barnum effecting myself with these questionnaires?
-
I went to a therapist and she recommended I see a psychiatrist to test for ADHD Points for: a neutral unbiased person said I might have ADHD. Big point for. Points against: she was clearly just reading a questionnaire that was very similar to ones I had done myself while researching it. She was also young and seemingly fresh out of school. So, did I unintentionally coach myself by researching ADHD beforehand?
-
The psychiatrist eventually diagnosed me with ADHD Points for: a real, professional psychiatrist diagnosed me with ADHD. Very big point for. Points against: the psychiatrist initially said I probably didn't have ADHD. Then, I did a TOVA test, slightly landed in the ADHD range of the test, and now he thinks I have ADHD and tried to instantly prescribe me medication (I declined and wanted to think about it first. I eventually agreed). When I later researched computer ADHD tests, they did not seem very reliable compared to taking a patient history, which this doctor didn't do. The psychiatrist also tried to get me to do a genetic test to see which medication "matched" my genes, but when I researched that, the evidence for it being effective seemed weak. So, I have a slight hunch that he is just trying to get more money from me.
-
I started Methylphenidate ER Points for: I feel slightly more focused and haven't really felt "wired" Points against: even after two dosage increases (I'm on 36mg right now. The other day, I took 45mg using leftover, lower dosed, pills from before my dosage increased. It felt the same as 36mg), it is not really that big of an effect. It feels like being on caffeine all day. From research, I know that you shouldn't use a negative/low reaction to stimulants as a way to rule out an ADHD diagnosis, but surely it is relevant in a Bayesian sense, right?
Another thing is that I don't fit the stereotypical ADHD person. When I showed up, I was always able to focus in class, in boring meetings, etc. I was a "quiet" kid. I was always able to sit still in class and such and never really caused problems. Someone who can sit still and focus in class (if I couldn't, I wouldn't have been able to pass any classes given I basically never did homework or other assignments. My test grades saved me) does not really fit the ADHD image
jeroboam
54m ago
Seems possible, but also really stupid unless you think higher odds on Polymarket actually changes the real odds more than trivially.
If the market becomes obviously wrong (like Trump at 85%) then it will attract essentially unlimited money on the other side of the bet that will make it impossible for a single whale to fight.
They say that markets can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent. But that's actually NOT TRUE about prediction markets because they have a concrete end date.
FiveHourMarathon
Just a Wawa Stan Account
58m ago
Sure, but that makes the argument about "alcohol can't be outlawed because you can just ferment berry juices" rather silly and sophistic as a point of comparison. Sorta like what shinzo Abe zip gun is to gun control. Like yeah you can do it, but gangs in gun controlled countries aren't and haven't been killing each other with gizmos.
I'll always just return to my actual experience: as a teenager weed was illegal period while alcohol was illegal for me. I could text any of half a dozen people and get weed within a day. Getting alcohol was a process.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
1hr ago
I guarantee this has been well-studied somewhere, if only by the police. There’s a lot of papers on determining homicide vs. suicide via location and angle. That implies some sort of literature on homicide pathology. My searches weren’t very fruitful, though.
TheFooder
1hr ago
I'm left hoping that the winning candidate is not able to implement their policies.
The only sane point-of-view in modern American presidential politics.
jeroboam
1hr ago
This theory doesn't work unfortunately. PredictIt is not a real market. Betters are limited to $850 per contract. Also, to buy shares in both Kamala and Donald would cost you $1.06 right now. On Polymarket you can own both for $0.998.
So your 6% profit all gets eaten by transaction costs. And it's not possible to buy more than $850, so it's also impossible for a single whale to pump and dump. Polymarket is a liquid prediction market. PredictIt, on the other hand, is just a toy. That explains the weird behavior you are seeing.
If you are confident that Kamala has a greater than 41.7% chance of winning you can go on Polymarket right now and make real money.
faceh
1hr ago
There's reputational risk for having his model diverge too far from the prediction market's call, if the markets end up looking more accurate.
And I've seen him offer various bets before.
I like Nate generally, but I end up with the feeling that the Presidential Election model is a bit too gimmicky for my tastes. As stated, he should display some factor that accounts for the inherent uncertainty of a long-term prediction, rather than making confident-seeming prognostications which get aggressively revised as new information comes in.
He's not calling his shot well in advance, he's just adjusting to the same information everyone else gets as it comes in. Credit for the model being reasonable, but what new information is it giving us?
netstack
Texas is freedom land
1hr ago
I’d take it if you had one.
But I’d settle for an interview, or even rumors like we had for Obama and Biden.
Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to fuck it up.
Tiber727
1hr ago
There's evidence suggesting some Russians are shooting Ukrainian soldiers after they've surrendered, which is a very stupid thing to do from a tactical perspective. Drawing a parallel, if this claim is true it needn't be for tactical benefit, it could be purely emotional and because they believe they are immune from consequences.
pm_me_passion
אֲנָשִׁים נֹשְׂאֵי מָגֵן וְחֶרֶב וְדֹרְכֵי קֶשֶׁת וּלְמוּדֵי מִלְחָמָה
1hr ago
Yeah, the posts on Philadelphi were pretty crazy. Rafah is split by the Egypt-Gaza border, so any kind of physical barrier there has to be right against the city - a pain for both the residents and the soldiers in the posts. It’s also a damned-if-you-do, dead-if-you-don’t situation, as we can see today, since leaving the area unmonitored just makes weapons smuggling into Gaza very very easy (but having settlers there was pure insanity).
IDF is back in the same spot now, and I hope we’ve learned our lessons from last time. Everything 1 km from Philadelphi needs to be razed.
BTW, you can see a bit of what Girit (badger) was like at the time here.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
1hr ago
Overt racism has definitely gotten less acceptable. Opponents of civil rights have been fighting a defensive action since the 50s. Atwater probably said it best:
Y'all don't quote me on this. You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger". By 1968, you can't say "nigger"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this", is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger". So, any way you look at it, race is coming on the back-burner.
So, sure. Republicans didn’t implement anything as racist as the Southern Democrats. They just fought a rearguard action for policies more extreme and immoral than anything in today’s Overton window. Every now and then, they’d try something on a large enough scale to get slapped down in the courts.
Rov_Scam
1hr ago
On the other hand I do think NCAAF is in extreme danger of becoming NFL B league.
Not just an NFL B-league, but the crappiest form of NFL B-league. I'd kill for a true NFL B-league compared to the way this is going to look. No draft, no salary cap, players able to leave whenever they feel like it as soon as another team offers more money. I know I said I didn't want to get into it, but I'll probably make a post next week about why I think the sport is going to reach a breaking point some time within the next decade or so. Suffice it to say that, in addition to all the antitrust stuff that isn't going to go away, I think the networks have overextended themselves a bit with the size of these Power 2 deals. There's only so much money to go around, and God forbid if we enter into a recession, in which case (as my friends in video production always point out) advertising is the first thing to get cut. Even without a recession, comparable future deals just might not be that profitable, especially considering that the SEC has historically taken a lower payout than the Big 10 despite having larger market share. There's nothing I'd like to see more than Florida State negotiate a settlement that's still really expensive, go to the Big 10 but be limited partners for the duration of the existing deal (as are oregon and Washington, who only make about half of what the ACC teams get), only to find that the next deal isn't as lucrative as they had anticipated, which wouldn't be a problem except that they're already in hock to the private equity firm that financed the exit fee.
KMC
1hr ago
Counterpoint: legal cannabis has resulted in higher potency products. Highly concentrated cartridges and resins easily available, and higher potency flower as well. Granted, the higher potency flower has been the trend for longer than we've had legal cannabis in this country.
striker
1hr ago
Reminded of the story about … was it Leonardo? … who said that he wrote everything down because once he wrote it down he would remember it and never need the piece of paper again.
(Aware of the irony that I have half remembered a story about memory.)
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
1hr ago
Making alcohol illegal results in more distilled liquors and less lighter stuff, for the same reason illegal opiates results in stronger opiates being preferred.
FiveHourMarathon
Just a Wawa Stan Account
2hr ago
Yes but you can't get it in volume from the local corner store, which was the qualifier I put on it. Nobody drinks 64oz of spontaneously fermented homebrew and beats his wife.
We know this because even in countries with significant illegal alcohol problems, no illicit alcoholics are drinking homemade wine or beer in a problematic way. They're going blind from moonshine or bathtub gin.
ChickenOverlord
2hr ago
It was revealed to me in a dream
My point is this wasn't the case a few days ago. I could have bought Harris at $0.48 and sold Trump at $0.56 (aka buy 'No' at $0.44). Selling at market today would have been profit.
As for pump and dump, I think these markets are so thin that $850 would look like a pump and there's no reason to think, if it was a pump, that there was only a single individual involved. Volume doubled for a three day stretch, so something was happening and it was unlikely a single person.
I'm not confident in anyone winning anything...again, my point. I think the actual price per contract should be $0.50.
I'm also not trying to make 'real money' on prediction markets. I don't really understand who would do that...but w/e. What I'm interested in is how that market functions and how closely my predictions skew toward reality. Though, with your suggestion, I may take a closer look at Polymarket.
More options
Context Copy link