Archive for the tag 'Justin Wolfers'

Science comes to the rescue of the “leading academics” suffering lapses of memory —those who, on Monday, signed on to be on the board of the Prediction Market Industry Association, which is supposed to lobby for the legalization of InTrade’s real-money prediction markets in the United States of America —and, on the next Tuesday, signed Bob’s puritan and sterile petition.

Chris F. Masse July 17th, 2008

No Gravatar

CX717 = “memory pills”

US scientists have invented a pill that can boost memory.

-

Invented by Dr Gary Lynch from the University of California.

-

-

John Delaney (CEO of InTrade) - (InTrade PDF file - CFTC PDF file):

Nearly all leading academics, not known for their attraction to unanimity, have publicly supported event markets. A great majority of these academics have been supplied with Intrade market data in the past, a service that Intrade intends to continue, for all study leads to an increase in transparency and understanding of event markets. It seems that the leading event market academics make no distinction between the benefits derived from academic owned markets like Iowa Electronic Markets and commercial market platforms like Intrade.

Yet many academics, with some notable exceptions, do temper their policy prescription to suggest a “safe harbor” for academic sites where research might be more generally available. As noted above Intrade has gladly supplied its event market data, typically free of charge to most of the leading prediction market academics and their students, and we are committed to encouraging the future study of event markets by continuing to supply our event market data free of charge or at very deep discounts. The academics that study event markets do a great service in developing our understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of event markets. Some commentators suggest that market liquidity and breadth typically benefit all event market stakeholders. Thus far commercial platforms like Intrade seem to be providing the greatest depth and breadth in event markets.

As Intrade has been a staunch supporter of event market academic study, and supplies greater depth and liquidity in its event markets than any other platform, it seems strange not to be a preferred purveyor. Perhaps the predominant reason many academics have held back from advocating and treating all event markets alike is a sense that initiatives to clarify or unwind the legislation restraining the optimal development of event markets is unlikely to be achievable. It seems many academics and commentators suggest a slow bureaucratic and pragmatic caution rather than focus on the optimal result. While the optimal result may be more challenging to achieve, for consistency, for better price discovery for the benefit of all, as well as for the development of Intrade, we encourage CFTC to apply common goals, objectives and standards for all participants.

-

Prediction Market Industry Association - (PMIA)

4) Lobby for a clear legal and regulatory environment conducive to the productive adoption of prediction markets by individuals, firms, and governments, and ensuring free access to these markets by traders.

-

The PMIA’s first board is comprised of:

[...]
Robin Hanson (George Mason University)
Justin Wolfers (Wharton School – University of Pennsylvania)

-

Sphere: Related Content

Pssttt… Did I tell you that I like InTrade CEO John Delaney’s comment to the CFTC about “event markets” (prediction markets)? I can’t remember whether I did tell you that already. (I do suffer memory lapses, sometimes. I know it’s a common affliction, because I see that Robin Hanson and Justin Wolfers, just before they signed Bob’s puritan and sterile petition, completely forgot that they were on the board of the Prediction Market Industry Association, which is supposed to lobby for the legalization of InTrade’s real-money prediction markets in the United States of America. A lapse in memory, probably.)

Chris F. Masse July 17th, 2008

No Gravatar

John Delaney (CEO of InTrade) - (InTrade PDF file - CFTC PDF file):

Nearly all leading academics, not known for their attraction to unanimity, have publicly supported event markets. A great majority of these academics have been supplied with Intrade market data in the past, a service that Intrade intends to continue, for all study leads to an increase in transparency and understanding of event markets. It seems that the leading event market academics make no distinction between the benefits derived from academic owned markets like Iowa Electronic Markets and commercial market platforms like Intrade.

Yet many academics, with some notable exceptions, do temper their policy prescription to suggest a “safe harbor” for academic sites where research might be more generally available. As noted above Intrade has gladly supplied its event market data, typically free of charge to most of the leading prediction market academics and their students, and we are committed to encouraging the future study of event markets by continuing to supply our event market data free of charge or at very deep discounts. The academics that study event markets do a great service in developing our understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of event markets. Some commentators suggest that market liquidity and breadth typically benefit all event market stakeholders. Thus far commercial platforms like Intrade seem to be providing the greatest depth and breadth in event markets.

As Intrade has been a staunch supporter of event market academic study, and supplies greater depth and liquidity in its event markets than any other platform, it seems strange not to be a preferred purveyor. Perhaps the predominant reason many academics have held back from advocating and treating all event markets alike is a sense that initiatives to clarify or unwind the legislation restraining the optimal development of event markets is unlikely to be achievable. It seems many academics and commentators suggest a slow bureaucratic and pragmatic caution rather than focus on the optimal result. While the optimal result may be more challenging to achieve, for consistency, for better price discovery for the benefit of all, as well as for the development of Intrade, we encourage CFTC to apply common goals, objectives and standards for all participants.

-

Prediction Market Industry Association - (PMIA)

4) Lobby for a clear legal and regulatory environment conducive to the productive adoption of prediction markets by individuals, firms, and governments, and ensuring free access to these markets by traders.

-

The PMIA’s first board is comprised of:

[...]
Robin Hanson (George Mason University)
Justin Wolfers (Wharton School – University of Pennsylvania)

-

Sphere: Related Content

How InTrade CEO John Delaney tried to undo the great damage done to the prediction market industry by Bob’s little minions (among them, Robin Hanson and Justin Wolfers)

Chris F. Masse July 17th, 2008

No Gravatar

John Delaney (CEO of InTrade) - (InTrade PDF file - CFTC PDF file):

Nearly all leading academics, not known for their attraction to unanimity, have publicly supported event markets. A great majority of these academics have been supplied with Intrade market data in the past, a service that Intrade intends to continue, for all study leads to an increase in transparency and understanding of event markets. It seems that the leading event market academics make no distinction between the benefits derived from academic owned markets like Iowa Electronic Markets and commercial market platforms like Intrade.

Yet many academics, with some notable exceptions, do temper their policy prescription to suggest a “safe harbor” for academic sites where research might be more generally available. As noted above Intrade has gladly supplied its event market data, typically free of charge to most of the leading prediction market academics and their students, and we are committed to encouraging the future study of event markets by continuing to supply our event market data free of charge or at very deep discounts. The academics that study event markets do a great service in developing our understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of event markets. Some commentators suggest that market liquidity and breadth typically benefit all event market stakeholders. Thus far commercial platforms like Intrade seem to be providing the greatest depth and breadth in event markets.

As Intrade has been a staunch supporter of event market academic study, and supplies greater depth and liquidity in its event markets than any other platform, it seems strange not to be a preferred purveyor. Perhaps the predominant reason many academics have held back from advocating and treating all event markets alike is a sense that initiatives to clarify or unwind the legislation restraining the optimal development of event markets is unlikely to be achievable. It seems many academics and commentators suggest a slow bureaucratic and pragmatic caution rather than focus on the optimal result. While the optimal result may be more challenging to achieve, for consistency, for better price discovery for the benefit of all, as well as for the development of Intrade, we encourage CFTC to apply common goals, objectives and standards for all participants.

-

This discourse should be given to read to children in public and private schools, all over the world.

-

Sphere: Related Content

How InTrade CEO John Delaney rightfully spanked the posteriors of Bob’s little minions (among them, Robin Hanson and Justin Wolfers)

Chris F. Masse July 17th, 2008

No Gravatar

John Delaney (CEO of InTrade) - (InTrade PDF file - CFTC PDF file):

Nearly all leading academics, not known for their attraction to unanimity, have publicly supported event markets. A great majority of these academics have been supplied with Intrade market data in the past, a service that Intrade intends to continue, for all study leads to an increase in transparency and understanding of event markets. It seems that the leading event market academics make no distinction between the benefits derived from academic owned markets like Iowa Electronic Markets and commercial market platforms like Intrade.

Yet many academics, with some notable exceptions, do temper their policy prescription to suggest a “safe harbor” for academic sites where research might be more generally available. As noted above Intrade has gladly supplied its event market data, typically free of charge to most of the leading prediction market academics and their students, and we are committed to encouraging the future study of event markets by continuing to supply our event market data free of charge or at very deep discounts. The academics that study event markets do a great service in developing our understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of event markets. Some commentators suggest that market liquidity and breadth typically benefit all event market stakeholders. Thus far commercial platforms like Intrade seem to be providing the greatest depth and breadth in event markets.

As Intrade has been a staunch supporter of event market academic study, and supplies greater depth and liquidity in its event markets than any other platform, it seems strange not to be a preferred purveyor. Perhaps the predominant reason many academics have held back from advocating and treating all event markets alike is a sense that initiatives to clarify or unwind the legislation restraining the optimal development of event markets is unlikely to be achievable. It seems many academics and commentators suggest a slow bureaucratic and pragmatic caution rather than focus on the optimal result. While the optimal result may be more challenging to achieve, for consistency, for better price discovery for the benefit of all, as well as for the development of Intrade, we encourage CFTC to apply common goals, objectives and standards for all participants.

-

Excellent.

However, simply to say that we want the “optimal” solution won’t do the trick, alas. I’ll blog about that, later.

-

Sphere: Related Content

How InTrade CEO John Delaney rightfully slammed Bob’s little minions (among them, Robin Hanson and Justin Wolfers) as hypocrite and short-sighted —and how he told the CFTC to put Bob’s petition (signed by Robin Hanson and Justin Wolfers, among others) in the trash can (where it belongs).

Chris F. Masse July 16th, 2008

No Gravatar

John Delaney (CEO of InTrade) - (InTrade PDF file - CFTC PDF file):

Nearly all leading academics, not known for their attraction to unanimity, have publicly supported event markets. A great majority of these academics have been supplied with Intrade market data in the past, a service that Intrade intends to continue, for all study leads to an increase in transparency and understanding of event markets. It seems that the leading event market academics make no distinction between the benefits derived from academic owned markets like Iowa Electronic Markets and commercial market platforms like Intrade.

Yet many academics, with some notable exceptions, do temper their policy prescription to suggest a “safe harbor” for academic sites where research might be more generally available. As noted above Intrade has gladly supplied its event market data, typically free of charge to most of the leading prediction market academics and their students, and we are committed to encouraging the future study of event markets by continuing to supply our event market data free of charge or at very deep discounts. The academics that study event markets do a great service in developing our understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of event markets. Some commentators suggest that market liquidity and breadth typically benefit all event market stakeholders. Thus far commercial platforms like Intrade seem to be providing the greatest depth and breadth in event markets.

As Intrade has been a staunch supporter of event market academic study, and supplies greater depth and liquidity in its event markets than any other platform, it seems strange not to be a preferred purveyor. Perhaps the predominant reason many academics have held back from advocating and treating all event markets alike is a sense that initiatives to clarify or unwind the legislation restraining the optimal development of event markets is unlikely to be achievable. It seems many academics and commentators suggest a slow bureaucratic and pragmatic caution rather than focus on the optimal result. While the optimal result may be more challenging to achieve, for consistency, for better price discovery for the benefit of all, as well as for the development of Intrade, we encourage CFTC to apply common goals, objectives and standards for all participants.

-

InTrade CEO John Delaney’s comment to the CFTC is a major contribution, and I’ll blog about it many times under different angles during this Summer 2008.

-

Sphere: Related Content

Justin Wolfers = Open Researcher

Chris F. Masse June 30th, 2008

No Gravatar

“Open” in the sense described in this document.

Consider this:

  1. The ungated version of a document is provided.
  2. The references are provided in a special file
  3. The pieces of evidence are stated in a special file.
  4. The raw data are provided in a special file —so that you can apply your own statistical method to them.

-

Amazing.

-

Now, contrast Justin Wolfers with that British professor (the little poodle of a British prediction exchange), who, when asked by me what he meant by “betting markets” (a quite vague term that covered different things at different times), replied to me, “I meant what I wrote”.

-

Sphere: Related Content

PREDICTION MARKETS: Robin Hanson & Justin Wolfers

Chris F. Masse June 24th, 2008

No Gravatar

I have been chatting with a prediction market practitioner (I won’t tell you who, and no, it’s not whom you think of) —shooting the breeze, and talking about the current state of the prediction market industry… taking about things and people… talking up some people… and badmouthing others ( :-D ).

-

At the end, the conversation barged on the issue of advisory boards“. And he told me that Robin Hanson and Justin Wolfers have helped him TREMENDOUSLY —in terms of solving problems with new software features, case studies, applied research, etc.

Wow.

-

Sphere: Related Content

Justin Wolfers [*] is the most cited prediction market economist

Chris F. Masse June 15th, 2008

No Gravatar

Economist Rankings at IDEAS

#390: Vernon Smith — #644: Justin Wolfers

-

E-mail me if you think I forgot to spot a name in the list. (That could well be. There are so many names in the list.)

-

[*] I suppose that the other guy is somewhat associated with that result.

-

Sphere: Related Content

Forecasting Election Outcomes

Chris F. Masse June 13th, 2008

No Gravatar

THE CROWD IS SMARTER THAN JUSTIN WOLFERS.

Chris F. Masse June 4th, 2008

No Gravatar

He did 4:14.

They had predicted 4:23 —and he had predicted 3:58.

-

Sphere: Related Content

Next »