Will Eliezer Yudkowsky's $150,000 UFO bet market spend at least a week below X% in 2025 (multiple levels)?
Will Eliezer Yudkowsky's $150,000 UFO bet market spend at least a week below X% in 2025 (multiple levels)?
29
1.4kṀ51k
resolved Mar 1
Resolved
N/A
20%
Resolved
N/A
39%
Resolved
N/A
50%
Resolved
N/A
80%
Resolved
N/A
82%
Resolved
N/A
84%
Resolved
N/A
86%
Resolved
N/A
88%
Resolved
N/A
90%
Resolved
N/A
91%

The market in question:

Any 7 day period in 2025 where it does not get to X% or above (as displayed in the UI) counts.

Resolves N/A if loan rules change in 2025 (because loan rules influence the market in question a lot).

I plan to bet in this market since the resolution criteria are objective.

Get
Ṁ1,000
to start trading!


Sort by:
bought Ṁ75 88% NO4mo

@Bair wanna bet more for the 90% one?

bought Ṁ25 86% YES4mo

@Bayesian yeah, but not too much :) you alone can keep it above 90% for a long time

opened a Ṁ1,000 90% NO at 95% order4mo

@Bair wait, you're the main NO holder! do you actually believe in aliens / the UFOs having a world shattering origin?

4mo

@Bayesian yes, I wouldn't be overinvested in it this much if I didn't

4mo

@Bair why tho 😭

4mo

@Bayesian some personal experience, but it wouldn't convince you, so there's no point in talking about it.

If you really want to understand how someone rational can not only seriously consider it, but actually find it likely, I recommend listening to some podcasts with Matthew Pines, for example this one: https://youtu.be/LpLFWdsIU7M?si=AOzWqA3t6kfTr6GQ (or at least ask some AI to summarize the transcript).

4mo

@Bair oh.. ok the introduction makes me think it is insane but thank you

4mo

@Bayesian I can see why, but give it a shot, even if you won't be convinced , it's probably going to be entertaining.

4mo

If someone else is curious, but doesn't want to waste 4 hours without some assurance that Matthew is not a typical crank, here's a summary you can read in a minute.

4mo

@Bair the arguments seem to rely on the UFO sightings in themselves are very unlikely to be caused by equipment failure and false measurements. it seems to me overwhelmingly more likely that those are at fault in general, than that the UFO sightings are from extraterrestrial origin or something. I don't get it. I asked the AI to provide a detailed argument the podcast presents for why the UFO sightings will have world shattering origin, and it just doesn't consider / rule out the default assumption, that it's measurement errors. I am made more skeptical by the fact that you asked the AI to agree some conclusion was justified, instead of displaying the line of reasoning that led to this conclusion, so that anyone can verify the validity of the argument, but that's a detail I guess

@Bayesian Ok, fair points. My question to AI was indeed somewhat loaded. And you can dismiss any individual claim of any sort by insisting it actually might be a measurement error (though there are many cases with multiple credible witnesses and many modes of measurement where it's much harder to do, still possible). There are just too many individual claims, and you are probably not aware of them because you haven't looked into it enough.

And I understand why what I wrote above won't persuade you. And even if Trump says later this year that all Grusch's claims are true, you'd still probably think it's a psyop of some kind. It's hard to change one's mind about this unless you have personal experience.

4mo

@Bair Do you think trump saying it’s all true is likely? We might be able to find a bet we both wanna make in that regard

@Bayesian I need to see how he behaves in the first couple of months of his presidency to decide how likely it is. I can bet in a market about it then. For example, it can be added to your "What will happen during Trump's second term" market.

What is this?

What is Manifold?
Manifold is the world's largest social prediction market.
Get accurate real-time odds on politics, tech, sports, and more.
Or create your own play-money betting market on any question you care about.
Are our predictions accurate?
Yes! Manifold is very well calibrated, with forecasts on average within 4 percentage points of the true probability. Our probabilities are created by users buying and selling shares of a market.
In the 2022 US midterm elections, we outperformed all other prediction market platforms and were in line with FiveThirtyEight’s performance. Many people who don't like betting still use Manifold to get reliable news.
ṀWhy use play money?
Mana (Ṁ) is the play-money currency used to bet on Manifold. It cannot be converted to cash. All users start with Ṁ1,000 for free.
Play money means it's much easier for anyone anywhere in the world to get started and try out forecasting without any risk. It also means there's more freedom to create and bet on any type of question.
© Manifold Markets, Inc.Terms + Mana-only TermsPrivacyRules