I was looking through this prediction market on @context and noticed something interesting. Context uses AI to resolve all markets, and one of them is being resolved completely incorrectly due to AI hallucination. This prediction market is about whether a MetaMask token generation event will occur before October 3. The AI interpreted the mUSD stablecoin rollout as a “yes,” which is incorrect. If you're not aware, MetaMask has yet to launch a native token, and the mUSD launch is old news. mUSD was launched weeks ago. This is why prediction markets must not rely solely on AI for resolutions without human moderation, as real money is at stake. I think people will not trust such platforms with serious money. In this MetaMask example, the AI lacks the nuance to distinguish between a native MetaMask token and its separate stablecoin rollout. I’d like to understand from Context’s founders how they justify operating such erroneous markets run via AI. This is comparatively worse than UMA whales trying to manipulate Polymarket resolutions, because in that scenario, at least the Polymarket team can intervene. But on Context, it looks like the markets are managed and entirely resolved with AI without any moderation cc @worm_emoji