This is a rare W for X, assuming what they say about their ability to sue the government is true. Modi’s government is far right, so if X is simply politically motivated, there’s no reason for them to make this post. They certainly could still be politically motivated, but maybe that’s limited to the US.

I’m still very much not a fan of X, but I do like it when SM platforms reveal government BS.

Both things are true. Reddit is politically captured. Lemmy is politically captured. Etc.

X is doing the right thing here. X also sucks in a myriad other ways. Both things are true.

Don’t pick sides people, only side with the truth.

Could you give a few examples? The papal election seems very unique.

Same, but I had classmates who were.

Yup, the nose pickers just moved online.

100% agreed.

Here’s a relevant Louis Rossmann video where a US Senator (Ron Wyden) officially asked the FTC to look into issues like this. I sincerely hope something comes out of this.

Yeah, here’s how I think about it.

Let’s assume there are 10 candidates with a 1% chance to win each, and 9 candidates with a 10% chance to win each, as given by betting odds. Let’s also assume the odds are off by 2x for those bottom 10 candidates, and 1.1% point for the top 9.

The smart move is to bet on the bottom 10 candidates because your expected return is much higher than expected.

However, you still have an 80% chance of failure. That’s fine if you have enough instances to bet on, but you have maybe two or three in a lifetime. That’s not a high likelihood of winning long term, not to mention that most of your bets will fail even if you win once.

But that’s me thinking from an investing perspective since I’m not a gambler.

I just think it’s foolhardy to bet at all. There’s not enough information to make an informed decision, and even if you think you’ll have better average odds by betting on the underdogs, this is a very rare event so you don’t have the time to make it back up in averages.

The article doesn’t really state what your short summary states.

The reason Polymarket bettors got the papal conclave result so wrong is that the event is extremely hard to predict, Domer, one of Polymarket’s top pseudonymous bettors, said on X.

“It’s like walking into a store that doesn’t communicate with the outside world,” he said. “Not even the participants themselves would probably know how to handicap it.”

Choosing a new pope isn’t an open process, so there’s very little information to go off of. Something like an election has a lot of public information, so those betting odds are more likely to represent the actual odds in the election.

I really don’t think there’s much to learn here, other than that choosing a new pope is chaotic and the process isn’t very open.

It doesn’t quite have the same satisfying crunch though…

It’s not new, it happened a lot on Reddit, and I get a bit of that in real life too.

People are tribalist, and that sucks.

For example, if you read Lemmy comments without any real world experience, you’d think everyone who voted for Trump hates brown people and wants poor people to die. But I have family and close friends who voted for that douchebag, and they are good people, they just thought he’s a better option (and they generally don’t follow politics too much). And I don’t blame them, Harris had a crappy campaign, basically promising the same bad policies Biden had, and Clinton before her was worse. Why should they be interested in politics if we keep getting poor options?

People aren’t black and white. Yet we caricaturize them as such.

I think it’s more dumb kids than anything.

I try to correct it where I can because hopefully a handful will reconsider their stance and grow as a person, but they certainly won’t admit to it.

This fits with our understanding of personality disorders, which is that they are a small percentage of our society—around 10.5 percent, according to the recent DSM-5-TR.3

Idk, I consider 10% to be pretty high. If you add in selection bias, you could get an actual majority in a community having personality disorders just because the non-jerks largely self-select themselves out.

That said, I still think the conclusions here shouldn’t be taken at face value. The data was from surveys, and while I haven’t read their methodology, I would certainly hesitate to accept results of a survey for something like this (and for <10k responses). I personally find I’m more confrontational online, though I hope I’m generally still way more respectful than your common jerk.

The results are certainly interesting though.

Disagree. Prisons should be for rehabilitation, not punishment. You shouldn’t want to go to prison, but you should come out better than you went in.

Hey now, the US has multiple hydrogen stations, assuming you live in a certain area of California.

What does this have to do with Technology? Surely this would fit better under !business@lemmy.world or similar, no?

But is he actually in the White House? I’ve seen a lot of pictures of him golfing…

They should also be sued. They should merely add their own, not replace what’s there.