What should be learned from the Overcoming Bias fiasco?

#1. That mistake could happen to any blogger (including moi), as we are all keen to re-publish and link to other people&#8217-s writings without checking and researching the foundations of their rationale.

#2. James Surowiecki taught a lesson in journalism to Robin Hanson.

#3. Robin Hanson should have published James Surowiecki&#8217-s letters to the editor as a new blog post &#8212-in addition to posting addenda to the original, flawed, misleading blog post.

#4. James Surowiecki has confirmed that he has the capacity and the legitimity to lead the field of prediction markets. [Of course, Robin Hanson is capable of mutant abstractions (MSR) whereas James Surowiecki is not.]

That is all, folks. Read the previous blog posts by Chris. F. Masse:

How Google ranks the software providers of enterprise prediction markets

No Gravatar

[InTrade is #1 but their software is not yet available for enterprise prediction markets, as I understand it.]

#1. NewsFutures

#2. Inkling Markets

#3. Consensus Point

#4. Zocalo

#5. HSX Research

Source: The Google Search ranking of the &#8220-prediction markets&#8221- webspots&#8230-

External Link: Jed Christiansen&#8217-s review of the software providers of enterprise prediction markets. (I will take a deeper look to it at a later time, and will maybe blog about it.)

Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital: The Dynamics of Bubbles and Golden Ages

No Gravatar

Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital: The Dynamics of Bubbles and Golden Ages

&#8212-

Based on that book by Carlota Perez, the blogger at The Park Paradigm says that BetFair is a 6th-paradigm company.

In her model, the world has experienced five technological revolutions and “techno-economic” paradigms in the modern era, starting with the Industrial Revolution in the late 18th century, through to the current end of 20th century paradigm – the Age of Information and Telecommunications. So what happens when we look past the present age to the next – the sixth – techno-economic paradigm? What are the new and emerging opportunities that will present themselves in this “sixth paradigm”? Have we already witnessed the innovation that will lie at the heart of the sixth paradigm or is it still ahead of us? Will the sixth paradigm be the “Age of Markets”?

Separating cheap talk from truly held beliefs

No Gravatar

Plight of the Fortune Tellers: Why We Need to Manage Financial Risk Differently

&#8212-

In his book, Plight of the Fortune Tellers, Riccardo Rebonato describes how an invitation to bet can be used to separate cheap talk from truly held beliefs (and, in the process, ruin an otherwise engaging dinner conversation).

In the early to mid 1990s in the United Kingdom and in other European countries a widespread fear developed that a variant form of CJD might spread to humans. CJD is a fatal illness—also know as “mad cow disease”—that is well-known to affect bovines. The variant form was thought to have contaminated human beings via the ingestion of beef from cattle affected by the disease. … When the first human cases appeared scientists did not know whether they were observing the tip of an iceberg or whether the relatively few observed cases, tragic as they were, constituted a rather limited and circumscribed occurrence. “Expert scientists” were soon willing to go on record with statements to the effect that “it could not be excluded” that a catastrophe was unfolding. The nonscientific press was all too eager to jump on the bandwagon, and extravagant claims were soon presented, such as that hundreds of thousands, or perhaps even millions, of lives could be lost over the next decade. Specific probabilities were not stated, but the prominence of the reporting only made sense if the possibility of this catastrophic event was nonnegligible: the newspapers, at least judging by the inches of column space devoted to the topic, were not talking about a risk as remote as being hit by a meteorite.

As the months went by … the number of cases did not significantly increase…. Looking at the data available at the time with a statistical eye, I was becoming increasingly convinced that the magnitude of the potential effect was being greatly exaggerated. At just the same time, a well-educated, but nonscientist, friend of mine (a university lecturer) was visiting London and we decided to meet for dinner. As the conversation moved from one topic to another, he expressed a strong belief, formed by reading the nonscientific press, that the spread of CJD would be a major catastrophe for the U.K. population in the next five to ten years. He was convinced, he claimed, that “hundreds of thousands of people” would succumb to the disease. … I challenged him to enter a bet, to be settled in ten years’ time, that the number of occurrences would not be consistent with a major epidemic. My friend refused to take me up on my offer, despite my very attractive odds (attractive, that is, given his stated subjective probabilities). He claimed that “one does not bet on these things”- that he found my proposal distasteful- that, anyhow, he was not a betting man- and so on. I explained that I was not trying to gain material advantage from a possible human disaster, but I was simply probing the strength of his convictions on the matter. Ultimately, the bet was not entered, and the evening was rather spoiled by my proposal.

Julian Simon’s bet with Paul Erhlich is perhaps the most famous example of the use of a bet to test the strength of convictions. Robin Hanson has done a substantial amount of work on the foundations of such &#8220-Idea Futures&#8221- mechanisms. A similar concept underlies Long Bets and the Simon Exchange.

At Long Bets they say, “Long Bets is about taking personal responsibility for ideas and opinions.” That is the basic idea I had in mine when I suggested that “it would be a real public service to run well-conceived prediction markets based on the grandiose political pronouncements of the ‘chattering classes’.” It is all about an author taking personal responsibility for the opinions he publishes by, in effect via the prediction market, offering to fund countering opinions on well-defined claims if and only if those countering opinions turn out to be true.

(See also Chris Masse’s post. I’m not claiming any originality on my part here, I’m just trying to nudge the idea closer to common practice by suggesting a potentially interesting and fruitful area of application.)

Naomi Klein? Ann Coulter? Pat Buchanan? Michael Moore? Maybe they believe what they write, and would be willing to subsidize a prediction market out of their book royalties to demonstrate the strength of their convictions. Or how about the books from the current crop of U.S. presidential candidates—I wonder if these books contain any claims that are specific and substantive enough to be either true or false.

If such punditry-based prediction markets were common, mistaken-but-honest demagogues (those pundits who actually believe what they write, and are willing to stand behind it) would end up subsidizing more thoughtful analysts participating in the markets- correct honest demagogues would end up taking home larger financial rewards- and dishonest demagogues would dissemble, seek to avoid being pinned down on specific claims, and when pressed for actionable claims they would run and hide.

[Cross posted at Knowledge Problem.]

Could a political campaign use prediction markets?

No Gravatar

This is cross-posted from our Inkling Markets blog where we have far fewer readers than the illustrious Midas Oracle. :)&#8230-

&#8212-

There are several prediction marketplaces out there for the upcoming U.S. election season and probably more to come. All the ones we know of are intended for participation by the general public. But what if a Presidential campaign ran an internal marketplace? How could prediction markets be used to give a campaign a competitive advantage? We put our political operative hats on for a few minutes and came up with some scenarios:

Resource Allocations

Speaking to veterans of previous presidential campaigns, one of the biggest issues mentioned was building consensus internally on resource allocation across the primaries, then for the general election. Conflicting polling data and infighting among advisors often led to the abandonment of several states where post-mortem analysis of actual voting patterns showed the candidate would have had a chance. Using prediction markets as input to resource allocation decisions, questions could be asked that compare performance metrics across different states, i.e. levels of support among certain voter blocs, predicted endorsements, outcomes of local elections that could impact the general election, etc. This type of information is hard to gather through traditional polling mechanisms but could easily be captured across participants from individual states, locales, and the general campaign.

Fundraising Forecasts

We assume existing forecasting methods used by campaigns are fairly accurate at anticipating how much money will be raised on a quarterly basis from a defined donor list. What may not be as well defined, however, is the impact of various campaign maneuvers on donation levels. For example, a campaign could internally test various scenarios with national campaign staff, field workers, even undecided voters to see if certain activities drive increased fundraising. If the campaign goes through with the activity, the campaign could evaluate the market and pay it out. If not, the market could simply be refunded. Of course, a campaign could also use prediction markets as further input to official forecasts across the different fundraising channels, allowing a more diverse group of people who may have additional insight beyond the &#8220-MBA types&#8221- at campaign headquarters crunching numbers.

Risk Management

(Using Inkling,) questions in a prediction market could be generated by the national campaign and staff at the local level. This &#8220-web of questions&#8221- would be especially useful when trying to anticipate risks to the campaign. The prediction market could be a clearing house of the whispers, rumors, and self-perceived weaknesses of the campaign to continuously test their merit or impact on the campaign. For example, someone from the local staff may be aware of a negative perception the candidate suffers from in a particular voting district. They could run a prediction market about its impacts in an upcoming primary, i.e. &#8220-Will the candidate be perceived as weak on X in analysis of post-appearance local media coverage?&#8221- If the stock price remains low, that issue probably does not need to be dealt with specifically. If it&#8217-s high, it may be an issue the campaign chooses to address proactively ahead of the predicted negative coverage.

Policy Predictions

Given the interest shown to any major candidate, a prediction market gives a campaign an outlet for those supporters wishing to participate in a more meaningful way than simply donating money. A market geared towards public policy across a wide range of issues, both national and local, would be an excellent resource to send people to. Currently most candidate&#8217-s online presence is focused largely on networking, information dissemination, event notifications, and fundraising. A broadly available prediction market would allow people to provide input on what they think will happen from a policy perspective, i.e. will a particular bill pass? How much funding will an initiative receive, etc.? The campaign could then take these predictions as input to shape policy. A similar marketplace could also be set up with a more limited audience of dedicated national and local campaign staff. This marketplace could be augmented with policy experts from around the world to provide additional perspective.

Competitive Analysis

Intended for a tightly controlled group of trusted participants, prediction markets could be run on the performance of the other candidates related to their fundraising levels, endorsements, primary performance, etc. to see how one candidate compares to another. This information would be very useful for strategy formulation. Four years ago some of the candidates tapped the blogosphere to drive early campaign participation and fundraising success.

This year most candidates are trying to build up and leverage their online social networks a la Facebook. Will this campaign season also be the year we see a candidate tapping the collective wisdom of his/her sprawling campaign apparatus?

The war against online gambling

No Gravatar

On 14 November 2007, in a statement made before the House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary concerning internet gambling, Catherine Hanaway, the Unites States Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri stated:

It is the Department’s view, and that of at least one federal court (the E.D.Mo.), that this statute (The Wire Act) applies to both sporting events and other forms of gambling, and that it also applies to those who send or receive bets in interstate or foreign commerce, even if it is legal to place or receive bets in both the sending jurisdiction and the receiving jurisdiction&#8230-.. Currently, the FBI has several pending investigations concerning Internet gambling and the FBI has been the lead agency on several other investigations, which have already led to prosecutions. The FBI coordinates and consults with the Department on issues arising in Internet gambling investigations, particularly on international issues.

http://www.bettingmarket.com/deptofjust990007.htm

BetFair-TradeFair fights corruption, while TradeSports-InTrade does not.

No GravatarTennis Corruption - NYT

&#8212-

BetFair-TradeFair is legal and has ethics, while TradeSports-InTrade is not and has none.

&#8212-

Via Steve Roman who provides the recap and another excerpt, The New York Times:

[&#8230-] At the center of the investigation is Betfair, one of the largest so-called online sports exchanges, which matches bettors directly against each other, rather than against the house, as traditional bookmakers do. Betfair set off the current crisis when it voided $7 million in bets after Mr. Davydenko withdrew from a match against 74th-ranked Martin Vassallo Arguello of Argentina at the Prokom Open in August in Sopot, Poland. Mr. Davydenko retired because of an injury with Mr. Vassallo Arguello ahead, 2-6, 6-3, 2-1. During the match, Betfair notified the ATP that its security team had recognized irregular betting patterns.

[&#8230-] At Betfair, which is based in London, tennis ranks third behind horse racing and soccer among its one million customers, who together place five million bets each day. More than $60 million was handled for the Wimbledon’s men’s final, won by Roger Federer over Rafael Nadal.

Robin Marks, a Betfair spokesman, said the decision to void the bets from the match in Poland — the first time the company had ever done so — was an easy one. A large amount of money was coming in for the obscure match, Mr. Marks said, and the betting patterns made little sense: Mr. Davydenko went from an odds-on favorite to a significant underdog before the match started, and his odds drifted higher and more money came in for Mr. Vassallo Arguello even after Mr. Davydenko won the first set.

By the next morning, Betfair’s 40-person security team had unearthed additional information by combing its records and tracing unique Internet addresses. Betfair passed on that information in accordance with the ATP’s anti-corruption program, which was put in place in 2003 in the wake of a match-fixing scandal in cricket. Mr. Marks said Betfair has similar agreements with 28 other sports leagues on which it takes bets. He declined to specify what Betfair had found. “Why would the betting patterns change before a ball was even hit?” Mr. Marks said. “Why would more money come in against him when he had already won the first set? You come to the assumption that somebody knew something.” [&#8230-]

Previously: BetFair has an anti-fraud team whereas InTrade-TradeSports has none.

Read the previous blog posts by Chris F. Masse:

  • Terrorism Futures
  • InTrade-TradeSports and BetFair-TradeFair should take a close look at Cantor Fitzgerald’s strategy to gain a share of the $100 billion U.S. gambling industry.
  • The secrecy-seeking Mark Davies is solely to blame for all this mess… but this vibrating BetFair spin doctor has managed to repair the PR damages quite brillantly, it shall be said.
  • A Betting Exchange = A Bookmaker —> !??
  • BetFair’s new bet matching logic + BetFair Malta’s trading on the multiples
  • Dick Cheney, the new Churchill?
  • BetFair Malta’s combo market maker (trading algorithm + human market makers) operating on the multiples

Yes, Economics is a Science.

No Gravatar

ESA:

The Economic Science Association (ESA) is a professional organization devoted to economics as an observational science, using controlled experiments to learn about economic behavior. The ESA welcomes participation by economists interested in the results of such experiments, as well as scholars in psychology, business, political science, and other related fields.

What is experimental economics?

Experimental methods allow us to control economic institutions, information, policies, and other important variables, both in the laboratory and in the field. Laboratory techniques also make it possible for us to observe and control variables that would not be observable in the field, such as the preferences of buyers and the costs of sellers in the trading of an artificial good.

Experiments have provided important information about economic behavior in a variety of subdisciplines of economics, including game theory, consumer behavior, industrial organization, public finance, and labor economics.

Is economics a science? Greg Mankiw and Tyler Cowen answer &#8220-yes&#8221-. See also Wikipedia.

BetFair embrace decision markets.

No Gravatar

Betfair has launched a series of innovative betting markets which will provide clear indications of how public opinion views the on-going debate about climate change, by allowing people to speculate on climate indices developed to track the extent (or otherwise) of global warming.

Betfair’s exchange model will create a market price for climate change related outcomes, including the HSBC Investable Climate Change Index, the ECX CFI Futures Contract, and Highest and Lowest UK Temperature. The commission that Betfair earns from operating these markets will be ring-fenced and invested in the development of technologies to tackle the wider issue of climate change.

In what is a major blow to prediction markets supporters, the Betfair press release refers to aggregating market mechanisms as &#8220-decision markets&#8221-, rather than &#8220-prediction markets&#8221–

‘Decision markets’ have historically proved to be accurate gauges of political, economic and cultural change and better forecasters of the future than opinion polls and expert forecasts. Efficient market theory suggests that these climate markets will be the best aggregation of all the available information on the subject. This is the ideal place for experts, academics, businesses and interested parties to put money behind their views on long-range forecasts.

It remains to be seen how Chris Masse responds to the Betfair announcement.

[External Links: HSBC Climate Index + Carbon Futures + Highest and Lowest UK Temperature Futures]