You misinterpreted what I meant by a weakness. For example given the
progress that must have been making with the Starship tests it is entirely
reasonable to expect him to pull off something like transporting a Tesla in
some sort of demonstration possibly in the next year. At that point the
spirit of the claim would be true if given an extra year. This isn't simply
because of some stunt. It is because musk has specifically stated it is his
intent to penetrate the suborbital market with this vehicle. All of the
noise that's been made over the decades about scramjets Etc failed even in
this regard Of course a scaled claim could have dealt with this to some
extent. That said if the same a claim had been 30 instead of 25 years the
outcome would very likely have been the reverse.
> On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 10:04 AM James Bowery <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> This is the kind of thing that demonstrates a serious weakness in FX.
> One of the difficulties with FX (and I'm not accusing/criticizing Chris of
> this, but making a general point) is that there is an incentive to realize
> that the wording of a claim means that you have a different interpretation
> than everyone else, and if you can convince the judge of your
> interpretation then you stand to earn a lot by going against the intent of
> the claim.
> I personally benefited from this (or perhaps abused this) from the old
> claim "Astrology is statistically significant" by realizing that the claim
> simply boiled down to "the time of year or the location of birth can
> influence a person's personality" and found a wealth of psych studies
> proving that. This clearly did not match with everyone's interpretation of
> "astrology," and so the market was heavily skewed in the other direction.
> There's no great solution, because there is no incentive to post the
> question and clear the air before making purchases, or you lose any
> advantage. That said, if you recognize you're betting against the market,
> despite no new data but because of an interpretation difference, it's
> probably good to post to the mailing list eventually, and chose to buy
> ahead of time or not depending on your own guess at how likely it is you'll
> be able to convince people.
> (Obviously the true solution is to make the "intent" clear as possible in
> the wording of the claim, and for the non-claim-writers to ask as many
> questions and poke as many holes as possible during the writing phase, but
> that doesn't help after the fact.)