Added liquidity!

<deleted>

Why did you rule out the option that it decreases from today? The current value should be more like the expectation value (up to inflation) instead of the minimum.

@LeonBohnmann That was unintentional, if there is some limit.

@OzzieGooen Im also not sure how these work, but since the "HIGHER" bidders cannot lose more than everything (which they do on 1.0), I do not know where the extra profit should come from in case it was actually lower than 1.0.

@LeonBohnmann The bounds are actually 0 - 100. Not sure why the graph shows 1.

If you spam 9 in the "bet lower" box, it will show the real lower bound.

@travis Then why are "HIGHER" options so cheap? And how should 0 even work on a log scale? That's like unbounded losses for the "HIGHER" bidders. I think that preview below 1 is a bug.

@travis Do you remember what you entered when you created the question? Because the maximum on that graph also jumps between 10 and 100 when I click it.

@LeonBohnmann They never explained exactly how these work. They give this mapping formula in the API docs: (max - min + 1)^probability + minstart - 1

Maybe minstart is supposed to be min? I think the graph is wrong based on playing around with these two other numeric log markets:

When will Betelgeuse go supernova ?‌

What will the population of NEOM be in 2030?‌

@travis Oh, I thought it was min*(max/min)^probability, as shown in their plots. Their formula at least allows you to put in 0 as a minimum and that explains why they cannot use the min and max for their plots.