This is perfect in its own way

Natural minds and natural bodies are irreplaceable. Artificial minds are costless to replace. We might value artificial bodies more, since they aren’t so disposable, at least in the brief period when they are still few and costly. Could be a good period to set stories in.

In Vitalik’s post he mentions resolving only the highest-volume markets, which I think would address this concern even more directly, but I’m less confident I understand that version.

I dunno! Would be fun to find out

I wouldn’t say it was free, really. Like, if the creator would’ve needed to spend $1 in subsidies on a regular market, on each market that has a 90% chance of reversion they would need to offer $10 in subsidies to compensate, or whatever.

Since the expected payouts on each market are much lower, you probably need big subsidies to compensate. And since you don’t know ahead of time which markets you will resolve, you have to fund them all.

You want traders to give you cheap but calibrated estimates for all the claims. The randomization reduces the expected size of payouts they’d receive for their bets, since each market only has a 10% chance of getting audited & resolved, but it preserves the incentive to bet their true probabilities.

Let’s take this to DMs :)

So if you create a prediction market because you want information on a question, you can think of the market subsidy as the compensation you’re paying folks for their information.

Yeah. It’s kinda subtle. With a subsidy, you’re basically giving away money as an incentive. But you can increase liquidity without giving away money.

You’re thinking of liquidity, which is related but not the same. Subsidy here just means committing money to increase the payouts to whoever is right.

What do you mean by “solve”?

You wanted information about all 100, so you subsidize markets on all of them, and traders can’t tell ahead of time which ones will be resolved, so if your subsidies were big they are incentivized to trade on any/all of the markets that they have information about.

Feel like they’ve made a lot of wild statements but I don’t know if anybody has collected those in one place for easy reference.

It isn’t super clear to me what the monthly pricing will be. Like, on the one hand in a competitive market I think the price of AI services will tend downward toward the marginal cost. But also there are only a few providers and constraints on supply. Not sure how it comes out on balance.

It might be like that! If so I would expect an experiment like this to indicate that. :)

Ah. Yeah I don’t think there’s anything special about services that brand themselves as “AI agents”. What matters IMO is it’s opaquely doing expensive work on behalf of the client without human oversight.

For those, I think they might want to advertise their guarantees. Not certain, though.