I like this. A lot to chew on for me. Especially the "optimize for the appearance of suffering" part.
A corollary of this is that when things are too easy (low pain) they are "cheating", "don't count", or somehow "illegitimate". I may have been making things too hard on myself for just that reason.
This post is about not having honest filters. Sounds like you disagree with that theory.
Which is fine, just explains where we are missing each other.
Maybe. Believing that no girl wants you means you won't try with girls and it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Believing every girl wants you means you will try and, even though you won't bat 1000, you're chances of success are literally infinitely higher.
I'm not a basketball expert at all, but I don't think you can choose to avoid the defender so that seems like a different thing than what I was getting at.
I can tell you this is a thing in PUA community. Believing that every girl wants you is incorrect, but more helpful than (also probably incorrect) belief that no girl wants you.
There are dumb teachers, fat dieticians, and doctors who smoke.
These answer seem to assume that people do dumb thing because they don't know they are dumb. There is much contradictory evidence to that assumption.
I don't know about formality, but Scott Young has frequently talks about the "Feynman technique" (writing summary as a way to learn) as a way to study.
Similarly, I often force myself to write summaries of books I have read. I often "feel" like I learned something even though I can't articulate what I learned or what I would do with that knowledge. Summaries help ensure that I'm not just taking that feeling of learning something at face value.
I guess I didn't/don't think of that as a goal of prediction markets.
The public gets value from the outputs of the market. One of the values of them is being able to get information from insiders who have info that they wouldn't have otherwise shared. Bad data is always a risk with or without prediction markets.
Seems like the PredictIt model of turning the questions into Yes/No questions where either side can bid up or down solves a lot of these. Or am I misunderstanding?
Are there any examples of government switching from paying for a thing to demanding price go down and it saving money?