(A response to @mabramov post from a couple days ago: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/WCutvyr9rr3cpF6hx/forecasting-is-way-overrated-and-we-should-stop-funding-it )

TL;DR: I agree with Marcus that broadly, additional forecasting funding to the tune of tens (!?) of millions of dollars at this point would probably not yield a great return. However, I think the benefits of some forecasting funding have been tremendous. Whatever funding it initially took to help get platforms like Metaculus and Manifold off the ground has had incredible ROI. Tens of thousands of people use those sites to get information every day, even though far less are actively forecasting on them, and they provide the infrastructure by which people can ask and get crowdsourced forecasting on consequential and mundane subjects for free.

~~~~~

As I understand Marcus's argument, his central thesis is that we haven't seen the benefits of this past forecasting funding, but I think the opposite is true! Here are just a few examples:

It's hard to measure the value of "epistemic infrastructure," not just for forecasting sites but also things like Wikipedia and OurWorldInData. That doesn't mean that value isn't there. Has Wikipedia been a good return on investment? Obviously! Manifold is far less impactful than Wikipedia, but Wikipedia gets [...]

---

First published:
April 27th, 2026

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/P9EdMqTscmcsorret/forecasting-is-not-overrated-and-it-s-probably-funded

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Graph showing Red Button/Blue Button vote results on Glosso, Blue 55%.

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.