> I loved using it while watching Season 50, and it identified several interesting threads early on.
The ideas in TFA are interesting, but it’s important to keep in mind that when we watch Survivor, we’re not watching something that happened in real time and then was simply compiled together. Survivor is edited after the fact, once the winners and all the arcs of contestants are known.
And don’t get me wrong! I love watching the show even knowing that in my mind. But a model built on the edited material is necessarily biased due to the format of the show itself.
> Confessional share (rolling share of confessionals over the last 3 episodes; this one is more about the editorial storytelling than the other features.)
The model picked this as a useful parameter, meaning it agreed that post hoc editing is important to keep in mind.
> By the finale, Kalshi’s “Survivor” market had reached a volume of $32.7 million
I don't get this. How are people "betting" on something that is "known information" for other people? What's the point? I get betting on stuff that no one can know, but who's taking "the other side" on these bets? Why would you put money into something knowing that there are people who already have the absolute answer?
Yes but in this case, tens or hundreds of people know the outcome months in advance. I'm very surprised that the market doesn't immediately converge to 100% for one candidate. The winner is not really a 'random event' in that by the time the show is airing, it's not being pulled from a distribution.
Well I didn't want apoilers so I stopped reading. If the author is here, please remove the navigation floater from the side. The article is so narrow. I had to zoom all the way in on my tablet to get one graph to be full sized. Impresaiveely it wasn't pixelated. I want to see your graphs better.
The ideas in TFA are interesting, but it’s important to keep in mind that when we watch Survivor, we’re not watching something that happened in real time and then was simply compiled together. Survivor is edited after the fact, once the winners and all the arcs of contestants are known.
And don’t get me wrong! I love watching the show even knowing that in my mind. But a model built on the edited material is necessarily biased due to the format of the show itself.
The model picked this as a useful parameter, meaning it agreed that post hoc editing is important to keep in mind.
I don't get this. How are people "betting" on something that is "known information" for other people? What's the point? I get betting on stuff that no one can know, but who's taking "the other side" on these bets? Why would you put money into something knowing that there are people who already have the absolute answer?
https://youtu.be/Hm3mDatFpNE?is=vKkBJs6XsypuD833
Insiders have an edge and can in theory shape the overall distribution of bets such that the real world outcomes are priced in better.