<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: European Foresight Project Launches Prediction Market.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/06/10/european-foresight-project-launches-prediction-market/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/06/10/european-foresight-project-launches-prediction-market/</link>
	<description>Prediction Markets, etc.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 23:13:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andreas Graefe</title>
		<link>http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/06/10/european-foresight-project-launches-prediction-market/#comment-15748</link>
		<dc:creator>Andreas Graefe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2007 08:41:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/06/10/european-foresight-project-launches-prediction-market/#comment-15748</guid>
		<description>I completely agree with Mike, the claims are indeed very underspecified. 

However, they have been predefined for the Delphi study. In a Delphi, you knowingly do not specify the claims too strong in order not to narrow the way of thinking of participants and to achieve a preferably broad range of opinions. It is not always the &quot;ex post accuracy&quot; of predictions that matters most when informing decision-making. You need somhow &quot;ex ante assessments&quot; of  future developments since the accuracy of long-term predictions can anyway not be judged in the present.

It is the aim of TechForX to analyze the capability of prediction markets (maybe the term &quot;idea futures&quot; or &quot;information markets&quot; would fit better here) for long-term forecasting compared to established approaches like the Delphi. Thus, in order to be able to compare both approaches it was necessary to formulate the claims exactly the same way. It is like Robin Hanson said: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/01/18/discussion-about-applicability-of-prediction-markets-for-long-term-prediction/&quot;&gt;&quot;Always remember that the relevant comparison is between different mechanisms on the *same* problem.&quot;&lt;/a&gt; 

Hence, the claims will not be judged (since simply no data sources are available) after the end of the study, neither in the Delphi nor in TechForX. The results just provide one of many inputs in the foresight process. The question is whether prediction markets are applicable as an instrument for foresight.

Thus, the particular aim of my dissertation is to compare both approaches with respect to different methodological aspects like for instance user behaviour (e.g. how often do participants change their minds), satisfaction with results (e.g. is there a consensus), etc.

------------

The missing permalinks are indeed a problem.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I completely agree with Mike, the claims are indeed very underspecified. </p>
<p>However, they have been predefined for the Delphi study. In a Delphi, you knowingly do not specify the claims too strong in order not to narrow the way of thinking of participants and to achieve a preferably broad range of opinions. It is not always the &#8220;ex post accuracy&#8221; of predictions that matters most when informing decision-making. You need somhow &#8220;ex ante assessments&#8221; of  future developments since the accuracy of long-term predictions can anyway not be judged in the present.</p>
<p>It is the aim of TechForX to analyze the capability of prediction markets (maybe the term &#8220;idea futures&#8221; or &#8220;information markets&#8221; would fit better here) for long-term forecasting compared to established approaches like the Delphi. Thus, in order to be able to compare both approaches it was necessary to formulate the claims exactly the same way. It is like Robin Hanson said: <a href="http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/01/18/discussion-about-applicability-of-prediction-markets-for-long-term-prediction/">&#8220;Always remember that the relevant comparison is between different mechanisms on the *same* problem.&#8221;</a> </p>
<p>Hence, the claims will not be judged (since simply no data sources are available) after the end of the study, neither in the Delphi nor in TechForX. The results just provide one of many inputs in the foresight process. The question is whether prediction markets are applicable as an instrument for foresight.</p>
<p>Thus, the particular aim of my dissertation is to compare both approaches with respect to different methodological aspects like for instance user behaviour (e.g. how often do participants change their minds), satisfaction with results (e.g. is there a consensus), etc.</p>
<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;</p>
<p>The missing permalinks are indeed a problem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris. F. Masse</title>
		<link>http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/06/10/european-foresight-project-launches-prediction-market/#comment-15746</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris. F. Masse</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2007 06:57:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/06/10/european-foresight-project-launches-prediction-market/#comment-15746</guid>
		<description>Mike Linksvayer is right, each event derivative should have a permanent URL and be indexed by the search engines.

To get to an event derivative, I would &quot;google&quot; this:
topic site:predictionexchange.com
and I would land on the specific page.

Unfortunately, the main prediction exchanges are not searchable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike Linksvayer is right, each event derivative should have a permanent URL and be indexed by the search engines.</p>
<p>To get to an event derivative, I would &#8220;google&#8221; this:<br />
topic site:predictionexchange.com<br />
and I would land on the specific page.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, the main prediction exchanges are not searchable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Linksvayer</title>
		<link>http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/06/10/european-foresight-project-launches-prediction-market/#comment-15744</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Linksvayer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Jun 2007 22:28:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.midasoracle.org/2007/06/10/european-foresight-project-launches-prediction-market/#comment-15744</guid>
		<description>Some good ideas here, but...

Claims look very underspecified to me.  What does &quot;never&quot; mean? What does &quot;most content&quot; mean? What does &quot;content&quot; mean? &quot;Profits without DRM&quot; is true now unless web pages are not content. What data sources will be used to judge the claims?

And it is inexcusable for markets to not have permalinks accessible without logging in.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some good ideas here, but&#8230;</p>
<p>Claims look very underspecified to me.  What does &#8220;never&#8221; mean? What does &#8220;most content&#8221; mean? What does &#8220;content&#8221; mean? &#8220;Profits without DRM&#8221; is true now unless web pages are not content. What data sources will be used to judge the claims?</p>
<p>And it is inexcusable for markets to not have permalinks accessible without logging in.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

