M

Mahi

10 karmaJoined In high school

Comments
2

Thank you for posting this!

“we’ve found people don’t know what issues they should be focusing on, and rather than a probability estimate, they want help to identify the most prescient questions”.

Interesting point. Curious whether this alludes to a broader bottleneck within forecasting around question generation itself, rather than question answering/calibration. My vague impression (though I don’t know anything about the practical workflows of forecasting organisations) is that a lot of attention/status accrues to producing forecasts, whereas identifying and specifying the right questions may be at least as important (and potentially harder?) 
I'd be interested to hear how much effort (as a rough %) forecasting orgs currently devote to question discovery/specification versus answering already-defined questions. 

Also wondering at what “level” this problem mainly exists. Is the issue:

  • identifying the broad strategic questions institutions should care about in the first place (e.g., cause prioritisation, emerging risks, etc), or
  • the more granular forecasting-design questions like framing, timelines, resolution criteria, etc?

    (or perhaps both of these are linked too tightly in practice to separate?)