being forced to put a probability on something not only exposes unserious thinking, but actually improves accuracy too. much in the same way asking someone to bet a nominal amount of money on an outcome seriously shifts how they talk about it. if journalism is the pursuit of truth, probabilities matter.

what we are more used to is opinion columns with implied conclusions dressed up as news reports.

now, are most substacks better when backed by live markets → no

do live markets = probabilities → no

does the sentence in the screenshots have justifications → yes