少点错误 05月29日 04:32
a case for a lesswrong private prediction market
index_new5.html
../../../zaker_core/zaker_tpl_static/wap/tpl_guoji1.html

 

本文提出在LessWrong社区内建立一个私有预测市场的建议,旨在提升理性思考能力,验证社区成员的预测准确性,并增强LessWrong网站及其理性主义运动的公信力。文章认为,通过预测市场,社区成员可以测试他们的世界观模型,获得明确的成功指标,并建立声誉。文章探讨了基于不同支付方式的实现方案,包括基于金钱、Karma积分和零和声誉系统。作者希望以此激发讨论,推动社区成员共同努力,将这一有潜力的想法付诸实践,克服理性主义运动中存在的倦怠和失望情绪。

🔮 建立私有预测市场的核心目的是让LessWrong社区成员能够测试他们的预测能力,并通过市场机制来检验其理性思考的实际效果。

💰 文章探讨了三种不同的预测市场实现方案,包括基于金钱、Karma积分和零和声誉系统。其中,金钱系统激励最强,但实施难度大;Karma系统易于实施,但激励相对较弱;零和声誉系统则具有最低的准入门槛,但易受操纵。

📈 预测市场能够为社区成员提供明确的成功衡量标准,并帮助建立声誉,从而促进社区内理性思考的实践和发展,同时提升LessWrong网站和理性主义运动的整体信誉。

Published on May 28, 2025 8:26 PM GMT

TLDR: Lesswrong should have it's own private prediction market so we can test just how well Lesswrongers stack up against the rest of the world which would build up the sites credibility, test and improve our arts of rationality and help address the burnout and disillusionment plaguing the rationalist movement.

a common question amongst rationalists especially on lesswrong is "why aren't rationalists winning?" or more generally "why are we not seeing clear benefits of rationality in real life?",this question has been discussed a lot on this site and has probably led many to become disillusioned with Lesswrong or the rationality movement all together.

rationalist seem to be suffering for the same problem as psychologists and sociologists, slow feedback loops and a lack of clear metrics for success (which often results in people defaulting to the standard strategy of establishing a "school of thought" and measuring their success by how many people they convince to their side, but thankfully we mostly avoided that failure mode) so i propose a method to resolve the issue, let's make a private prediction market where only Lesswrongers could participate and see how well our "maps" stacks up against the "territory".

for those who are new to prediction markets, they are markets where participants bet on the outcomes for a particular event (say an election), once the outcome of the event is resolved the losers pay out the winners.

it is a way to force people to "put their money where their mouth is" and one of the few reliable ways to test someones models of the world since it is a task you can't do well at consistently if you aren't rational .

here are the benefits i predict form this proposal:

    improving our skill at prediction through training.establishing a clear unambiguous metrics for success.allowing users who are good at predictions to establish a reputation.improve the credibility of the site and maybe the entire rationalist movement.having fun.

this proposal has many possible implementations mainly differing in the method of payment each with its pros and cons, i don't know which one is the best but i will list three ranked from least to most favorite to kick start the discussion:

    money based system: betting with actual money like a online sports gambling.

    Pros:

    strongest incentive.

    very hard to sabotage.

    cons:

    would likely be subject to online gambling laws and other regulation.

    high barrier for entry.

    hard to implement.

    karma based system: betting the the users karma.

    pros:

    lower barrier of entry.

    easiest to implement.

    somewhat good incentives.

    cons:

    it would be hard to tell someones betting performance based entirely on their karma.

    the barrier while low, is not that low, you still have to build up some karma first.

    somewhat vulnerable to sabotage.

    zero-sum reputation system: something like manifold where we use "points" to track the user performance, everyone starts with say 100 points, anyone above 100 is doing better then average and anyone below that is doing below average.

    pros:

    lowest entry barrier.

    very easy to track the users performance.

    cons:

    very vulnerable to sabotage.

this is by no means an exhaustive list, in fact as i was writing this i realized that proposals 3 and 2 can be greatly improved with a few amendments plus their is the problem of which questions should we ask on the market, but this isn't meant to be a comprehensive proposal just a primer to start a discussion on this topic.

one last note, this would probably be one of those "this might work but no one is gonna bother implementing it" kinda post, there isn't much i can do about this other then laying out my best arguments and pointing out that Lessworng has an entire graveyard of forgotten but promising ideas that never got past a couple dozen comments and upvotes because we failed to coordinate around it (of course, none of this applies if this idea is actually terrible).



Discuss

Fish AI Reader

Fish AI Reader

AI辅助创作,多种专业模板,深度分析,高质量内容生成。从观点提取到深度思考,FishAI为您提供全方位的创作支持。新版本引入自定义参数,让您的创作更加个性化和精准。

FishAI

FishAI

鱼阅,AI 时代的下一个智能信息助手,助你摆脱信息焦虑

联系邮箱 441953276@qq.com

相关标签

LessWrong 预测市场 理性主义 社区 认知偏差
相关文章