Scott Alexander presents a satirical 2024 presidential debate between Biden and Trump, featuring increasingly absurd positions on various issues. Longer summary

Scott Alexander moderates a fictional presidential debate between Joe Biden and Donald Trump for the 2024 election. The debate takes surreal turns as both candidates express increasingly bizarre views on topics like states' existence, abortion, wokeness, conspiracy theories, and immigration. Biden expresses solipsistic doubts about reality, while Trump argues for an expanded notion of America based on anthropic reasoning. The debate highlights the absurdity of political discourse through exaggerated positions and philosophical tangents. Shorter summary

The post explores recent advances in AI forecasting, discusses the concept of 'rationality engines', reviews a study on AI risk predictions, and provides updates on various prediction markets. Longer summary

This post discusses recent developments in AI-powered forecasting and prediction markets. It covers two academic teams' work on AI forecasting systems, comparing their performance to human forecasters. The post then discusses the potential for developing 'rationality engines' that can answer non-forecasting questions. It also reviews a study on superforecasters' predictions about AI risk, and provides updates on various prediction markets including political events, cryptocurrency, and global conflicts. The post concludes with short links to related articles and developments in the field of forecasting. Shorter summary

The post examines the performance of prediction markets in elections, current political forecasts, and various other prediction markets, while also discussing the challenges and potential of forecasting. Longer summary

This post discusses several topics related to prediction markets and forecasting. It starts by examining a claim that prediction markets have an 'election problem', showing that real-money markets performed poorly in recent elections. The author then analyzes current polls and prediction markets for the 2024 US presidential election, noting discrepancies between different platforms. The post also explores a forecasting experiment on AI futures, and reviews several other prediction markets on current events. Finally, it includes short links to other forecasting-related news and reflections. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander analyzes recent developments in prediction markets, including the LK-99 superconductor hype, a forecasting tournament, and new prediction market concepts. Longer summary

This post discusses several topics related to prediction markets and forecasting. It begins with an analysis of the LK-99 superconductor prediction markets, suggesting they were overly optimistic due to media hype rather than expert opinion. The author then discusses the Salem/CSPI prediction market tournament, highlighting how the top performers used various strategies beyond just predictive accuracy. The post introduces the concept of prediction portfolios, which allow betting on broader trends rather than specific outcomes. It also mentions a new prediction market for flight delays called Wingman.WTF. Finally, the post reviews current political prediction markets and other forecasting-related news. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander shares his 100 predictions for 2020, covering topics from coronavirus to personal goals, each with an assigned probability. Longer summary

Scott Alexander presents his annual list of predictions for the upcoming year (2020). The post includes 100 predictions on various topics including coronavirus, politics, economics, technology, his blog Slate Star Codex, personal life, and professional life. Each prediction is assigned a probability percentage. The predictions cover a wide range of subjects from global events to personal goals, with some entries redacted for privacy reasons. Scott explains the rules for these predictions and how they will be scored at the end of the year. Shorter summary

The post presents challenging hypothetical debate questions for presidential candidates, addressing controversial aspects of their platforms or backgrounds. Longer summary

This post presents a series of hypothetical debate questions for presidential candidates Jill Stein, Hillary Clinton, Gary Johnson, and Donald Trump. For Stein, the question challenges her stance on organic food and pesticides by citing conflicting scientific evidence. Clinton's question addresses her focus on implicit bias in policing, questioning the validity of Implicit Association Tests. Johnson receives a brief, humorous question about a fictional crisis. Trump's question focuses on his campaign CEO Steve Bannon's past involvement with the Biosphere 2 experiment, using it to question Trump's environmental policies. The questions are designed to be provocative and highlight potential contradictions or weaknesses in each candidate's positions or backgrounds. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander endorses Clinton (or Johnson/Stein in safe states) over Trump, citing concerns about Trump's unpredictability and potential negative impacts on conservatism and social dynamics. Longer summary

Scott Alexander endorses voting for Hillary Clinton in swing states, and Clinton, Johnson, or Stein in safe states. He argues against Donald Trump, not primarily on policy grounds, but because of Trump's unpredictability, potential for high-variance outcomes, and the damage he could do to conservatism and the fight against social justice extremism. Alexander expresses concerns about Trump's lack of concrete plans, his potential to radicalize the next generation towards the far left, and his movement's epistemic vices. He also touches on issues like global warming and immigration, urging readers to consider the long-term consequences of their vote. Shorter summary