Forecasting newsletter draft

ea/ForecastingNewsletter/May2020.md

@@ -197,7 +197,6 @@ The Center for Security and Emerging Technology is looking for forecasters to pr
 handicappers. Each judge was presented with a list of 88 variables culled from the past performance charts. He was asked to indicate which five variables out of the 88 he would wish to use when handicapping a race, if all he could have was five variables. He was then asked to indicate which 10, which 20, and which 40 he would use if 10, 20, or 40 were available to him.  
 
   > We see that accuracy was as good with five variables as it was with 10, 20, or 40. The flat curve is an average over eight subjects and is somewhat misleading. Three of the eight actually showed a decrease in accuracy with more information, two improved, and three stayed about the same. All of the handicappers became more confident in their judgments as information increased.  
-
   The study contains other nuggets, such as:
   - An experiment on trying to predict the outcome of a given equation. When the feedback has a margin of error, this confuses respondents. 
   - "However, the results indicated that subjects often chose one gamble, yet stated a higher selling price for the other gamble"
@@ -208,4 +207,6 @@ The study contains other nuggets, such as:
 As remedies they suggest to create a model by elliciting the expert, either by having the expert make a large number of judgements and distillating a model, or by asking the expert what they think the most important factors are. A third alternative suggested is computer assistance, so that the experiment participants become aware of which factors influence their judgment. 
 - [Immanuel Kant, on Betting](https://www.econlib.org/archives/2014/07/kant_on_betting.html)
 
+Conflicts of interest: Marked as (c.o.i) throughout the text. 
+
 Note to the future: All links are added automatically to the Internet Archive. In case of link rot, go [here](https://archive.org/)