Sure, but people in general are really bad at that kind of precise quantitative world-knowledge. They have pretty weak priors and a mostly-anecdotes-and-gut-feeling-informed negative opinion of gambling, such that when presented with the 28% percent increase in bankruptcy study they go “ok sure that’s compatible with my worldview” instead of being surprised and taking the evidence as a big update.
Yes, most people are generally bad at updating. That has nothing to do with whether or not someone is a libertarian.
The reason Zvi is surprised comes downstream of numerical literacy and not downstream of him being libertarian-leaning.
28% percent increase suggests that more than one in five go bankrupt because of sports online gambling (which would be a subset of gambling in general).
If I ask Claude for the top five reasons people go bankrupt in the US in 2023 I get:
1. Medical Debt
2. Job Loss/Income Reduction
3. Credit Card/Consumer Debt
4. Divorce/Family Issues
5. Housing Market Issues/Mortgage Debt
ChatGPT gives me:
Loss of Income
Medical Expenses
Unaffordable Mortgages or Foreclosures
Overspending and Credit Card Debt
Providing Financial Assistance to Others
I think Claude and ChatGPT do summarize the common wisdom about what normal people believe about what the most important factors for bankruptcy happen to be and that does not include gambling (let alone sports online gambling specifically). If you ask a normal person for the top five reasons they would likely come up with a similar list that does not mention sports online betting.
Yes, I think an unusually numerate and well-informed person will be surprised by the 28% figure regardless of political orientation. How surprised that kind of person is by the broader result of “hey looks like legalizing mobile sports betting was a bad idea” I expect to be somewhat moderated by political priors though.
Of course some of those can be influenced by gambling, eg it is a type of overspending. Even so, Claude estimated that legalized online gambling would raise the bankruptcy rate by 2-3% and agreed that 28% is surprising.
A side question: Why do you believe Claude/ChatGPT (not sure which model versions you used) can summarise this ‘common wisdom’? I’ve seen LLMs used in similar ways by other users and I don’t understand why or when it became commonly agreed LLMs could do this with any believability.
It’s a combination of the way LLM work that they predict the most likely token that very similar to prediction common wisdom and experience of interacting with LLMs.
Pattern matching also matters. After reading the answers from Claude and ChatGPT, you can ask yourself what you expect a person to tell you when you ask them for the top five reason and how likely it is that they will tell you “sports online betting” as one of the top five reasons.
Sure, but people in general are really bad at that kind of precise quantitative world-knowledge. They have pretty weak priors and a mostly-anecdotes-and-gut-feeling-informed negative opinion of gambling, such that when presented with the 28% percent increase in bankruptcy study they go “ok sure that’s compatible with my worldview” instead of being surprised and taking the evidence as a big update.
Yes, most people are generally bad at updating. That has nothing to do with whether or not someone is a libertarian.
The reason Zvi is surprised comes downstream of numerical literacy and not downstream of him being libertarian-leaning.
28% percent increase suggests that more than one in five go bankrupt because of sports online gambling (which would be a subset of gambling in general).
If I ask Claude for the top five reasons people go bankrupt in the US in 2023 I get:
ChatGPT gives me:
I think Claude and ChatGPT do summarize the common wisdom about what normal people believe about what the most important factors for bankruptcy happen to be and that does not include gambling (let alone sports online gambling specifically). If you ask a normal person for the top five reasons they would likely come up with a similar list that does not mention sports online betting.
Yes, I think an unusually numerate and well-informed person will be surprised by the 28% figure regardless of political orientation. How surprised that kind of person is by the broader result of “hey looks like legalizing mobile sports betting was a bad idea” I expect to be somewhat moderated by political priors though.
Of course some of those can be influenced by gambling, eg it is a type of overspending. Even so, Claude estimated that legalized online gambling would raise the bankruptcy rate by 2-3% and agreed that 28% is surprising.
A side question: Why do you believe Claude/ChatGPT (not sure which model versions you used) can summarise this ‘common wisdom’? I’ve seen LLMs used in similar ways by other users and I don’t understand why or when it became commonly agreed LLMs could do this with any believability.
It’s a combination of the way LLM work that they predict the most likely token that very similar to prediction common wisdom and experience of interacting with LLMs.
Pattern matching also matters. After reading the answers from Claude and ChatGPT, you can ask yourself what you expect a person to tell you when you ask them for the top five reason and how likely it is that they will tell you “sports online betting” as one of the top five reasons.