This is one of 25 props in the 11th annual Narcissist Forecasting Contest, as described here:
https://braff.co/advice/f/announcing-the-2026-narcissist-forecasting-contest
The prop and any ambiguities will be resolved by a panel of human judges, as described in the fine print of the entry form:
https://forms.gle/nDDxdxyYSNheY9FV7
This means that the prop may resolve differently from how other, similar-looking Manifold props resolve. Do not bet on this market if that is going to bother you.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Trader | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ285 | |
| 2 | Ṁ73 | |
| 3 | Ṁ52 | |
| 4 | Ṁ48 | |
| 5 | Ṁ45 |
People are also trading
@Eternal good question. It's on by default, which gives a reading of Kimi #12. Turning it off, top Chinese model is Qwen at #13. There's a separate filter called Factuality, under which Qwen is #10. But I suspect the Yes bets here are based on something else: reading the prop as "by August 1" instead of "on August 1."
@JasonMendoza2008 if there's no live controversy (i.e., nobody seriously arguing the Yes side) and if the status quo remains through end of day, I will resolve this as No. But if there's a genuine dispute, it goes to the judges in my longstanding forecasting contest, of which this prop is a mirror.
https://braff.co/advice/f/announcing-the-2026-narcissist-forecasting-contest
Will wait until end of day tomorrow August 1 to resolve this. Not sure why it's trading at 90% given that Kimi-k3-max is the top-rated Chinese model and it's been sitting at #11 all week. Anyone want to explain the interest in Yes here, in case there is something I need to explain to the contest judges?
@AdamBraff I assume the interest in the yes side here is due to rank spread (do we take confidence intervals into account?) and/or grouping of identical models at different thinking effort settings (can the same model count multiple times in the top 10?).