24 thoughts on “Censorship Isn’t the Answer to “Misinformation.” But Retrodiction Markets Might Be- Published by The Foundation for Economic Education”
I believe my article routes to the updated version of your paper.I checked it and it reflects the paper with the revised title of THE GÖDEL CONSPIRACY.
I just came to a revelation that may not be profound, nevertheless ….
Cancel culture = an informal threat to free speech that has yet to formally codified i statutory law( but has the potential be formally reflected in American law). Legally nothing can be done to stifle this cultural movement, which has greatly eroded public debate.
At its core, it is a “tyranny of the majority problem”, my question is how do we address it? It easier to shut someone up with social censure than it is to repudiate their points, if everyone else is in the same bandwagon.
Thank you Sir. Below is some feedback I received on the article addressing the issue of betting market distortions.
The latest comment on from the FEE website:
“…The left would spend millions of dollars on bots claiming false information, or true, whichever suits their narrative..”
There is always the potential for a tie; the determining moderator being biased. Also, other forms of strategic betting.
However, my though process was to use an incentives based form of information aggregation to serve as an imperfect information bridge.
However, the manner in which I formulated this concept; consumer sovereignty is implied. There were some good critiques of my article, but one commenter borderline ad hominem with his assessment of my work.
Spouting some clearly Rothbardian rhetoric about collectivism. But most Austrian entrepreneurship scholars would agree that successful firms should give deference to the consumer preferences. This is precisely my assertion, not only do you increase the odds of getting better info, you are also fulfilling your duty as service provider. I suppose this point was lost on this gentleman.
Some of the critiques against assertion of implicit (censorship that is not legally sanctioned) censorship transgresses private property rights, make sense, but are superficial.
1.) If there wasn’t public pressure Spotify would have taken no action again the JRE podcast. After all, Rogan is cash cow.
2.) Many of the illiberal feature of “cancel culture” seek to circumvent legal protections of free speech through organized social social censure. This form of collective action is truly detrimental to public discourse. I do not have a private solution for combating this insanity. However, I do hope to devise one.
3.) The concerns of the Federalist Papers are literally coming to life! Cancel culture is a “tyranny of the majority” problem. It is the ugly dark side of democracy; analogous to a lynching mob, Effectively democratizing rage, that all too often leads to a centralization of power (inference loosely influenced by the Road to Serfdom).
4.) When faced with pervasive outrage; regulations could be right around the corner.
Yes, “cancel culture” is definitely a pathogen to democracy that Publius foresaw.
I think many readers missed the fact that, in addressing our current information conundrum, your aim was not to provide a perfect solution but simply a better alternative. Retrodiction markets would at least ensure that more people started paying a price for being wrong! With “skin in the game”, folks would face the incentive to perform more in-depth investigations into certain questions before drawing any conclusions.
Question : Do any retrodiction markets exist yet? If not, do you have any plans to start one?
Regarding your question, I am not sure. I am trying to remember from Enrique’s paper if there were any operating Retrodiction Markets. At the very least his application of this variant of betting markets is novel and inspired my solution to the free speech problem. If so, there are probably far less than the number of Prediction Markets. Polymarket is currently getting sanctioned, but there are others (IEM, Predictit).
Some day I might, I need to do more research and raise some capital in order to pull it off.
One thing I have been wondering about is the potential for environmental regulations facing crypto currency. I am huge exponent of alternatives to government money, I would not want the energy consumption of proof of work mining to jeopardize the success of an up-and-coming altcoin or even Bitcoin for that matter.
Inverted logic 
PS: Here is a link to the latest version of my proposal: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3876710&dgcid=ejournal_htmlemail_law:humanities:ejournal_abstractlink
LikeLiked by 1 person
I believe my article routes to the updated version of your paper.I checked it and it reflects the paper with the revised title of THE GÖDEL CONSPIRACY.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Awesome!
LikeLike
I apologize because I did submit my draft prior to your latest revisions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s all good! I am honored to be included!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am glad to give you a shout!
LikeLiked by 1 person
thanks so much!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I just came to a revelation that may not be profound, nevertheless ….
Cancel culture = an informal threat to free speech that has yet to formally codified i statutory law( but has the potential be formally reflected in American law). Legally nothing can be done to stifle this cultural movement, which has greatly eroded public debate.
At its core, it is a “tyranny of the majority problem”, my question is how do we address it? It easier to shut someone up with social censure than it is to repudiate their points, if everyone else is in the same bandwagon.
LikeLiked by 1 person
excellent observation; perhaps you are our next de Tocqueville?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I appreciate it. I might need to work a little harder and bulk up my credentials to be the next de Tocqueville.
Something to aim for!
LikeLiked by 1 person
When de Tocqueville visited North America in 1831 and began writing his now-famous report “Democracy in America”, he was only 25 years old!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Really? Wow, may be I could make something happen then.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wow, this was an incredibly interesting piece!
I really like how these markets would serve to facilitate and reward the pursuit of truth.
And now I have what may be considered a very uninformed question, namely : if at all, how might retrodiction markets be distorted?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you Sir. Below is some feedback I received on the article addressing the issue of betting market distortions.
The latest comment on from the FEE website:
“…The left would spend millions of dollars on bots claiming false information, or true, whichever suits their narrative..”
There is always the potential for a tie; the determining moderator being biased. Also, other forms of strategic betting.
However, my though process was to use an incentives based form of information aggregation to serve as an imperfect information bridge.
However, the manner in which I formulated this concept; consumer sovereignty is implied. There were some good critiques of my article, but one commenter borderline ad hominem with his assessment of my work.
Spouting some clearly Rothbardian rhetoric about collectivism. But most Austrian entrepreneurship scholars would agree that successful firms should give deference to the consumer preferences. This is precisely my assertion, not only do you increase the odds of getting better info, you are also fulfilling your duty as service provider. I suppose this point was lost on this gentleman.
Some of the critiques against assertion of implicit (censorship that is not legally sanctioned) censorship transgresses private property rights, make sense, but are superficial.
1.) If there wasn’t public pressure Spotify would have taken no action again the JRE podcast. After all, Rogan is cash cow.
2.) Many of the illiberal feature of “cancel culture” seek to circumvent legal protections of free speech through organized social social censure. This form of collective action is truly detrimental to public discourse. I do not have a private solution for combating this insanity. However, I do hope to devise one.
3.) The concerns of the Federalist Papers are literally coming to life! Cancel culture is a “tyranny of the majority” problem. It is the ugly dark side of democracy; analogous to a lynching mob, Effectively democratizing rage, that all too often leads to a centralization of power (inference loosely influenced by the Road to Serfdom).
4.) When faced with pervasive outrage; regulations could be right around the corner.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, “cancel culture” is definitely a pathogen to democracy that Publius foresaw.
I think many readers missed the fact that, in addressing our current information conundrum, your aim was not to provide a perfect solution but simply a better alternative. Retrodiction markets would at least ensure that more people started paying a price for being wrong! With “skin in the game”, folks would face the incentive to perform more in-depth investigations into certain questions before drawing any conclusions.
Question : Do any retrodiction markets exist yet? If not, do you have any plans to start one?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Regarding your question, I am not sure. I am trying to remember from Enrique’s paper if there were any operating Retrodiction Markets. At the very least his application of this variant of betting markets is novel and inspired my solution to the free speech problem. If so, there are probably far less than the number of Prediction Markets. Polymarket is currently getting sanctioned, but there are others (IEM, Predictit).
Some day I might, I need to do more research and raise some capital in order to pull it off.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, if you generate a sufficiently promising looking business model, I can’t see why I wouldn’t hesitate to invest.
Also, is Enrique still going to pursue the PERC fellowship?
LikeLiked by 1 person
That I am unsure of… I know he would absolutely love to have a killer idea to present to PERC as potential research concept.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If so (I think it was the Julian Simon fellowship), the deadline is in 7 days!
LikeLike
https://www.perc.org/programs/scholars/julian-simon-fellowship/
LikeLike
*deadline for applications
LikeLiked by 1 person
One thing I have been wondering about is the potential for environmental regulations facing crypto currency. I am huge exponent of alternatives to government money, I would not want the energy consumption of proof of work mining to jeopardize the success of an up-and-coming altcoin or even Bitcoin for that matter.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What would be a good market-based/ environmental application of PMs/RMs would be the question?
LikeLiked by 1 person