I'll attend manifest, and he is too. I'll try to convince him that p(doom) > 5% and that managing AI-risk should be one of this top 2 policy priorities. If I succeed this will resolve YES, else it resolves NO.
It will resolve N/A if either:
1) He doesn't attend (maybe 10% chance based on my quick analysis)
2) I don't attend (~7% chance I'd say)
3) I'm not able to talk to him for more than 5 minutes despite a strong effort. (I'll try using the waypoint app to schedule a meeting, will look around for him physically in the conference and try to talk with him, and if he does any kind of open-mic event I'll try my best to get in there).
My own estimate that I'd be able to do this conditional on > 5 minute meeting time with around 50% probability.
I think I'm fairly persuasive, I think I know what arguments are likely to be persuasive to him, and I think in previous discussions about this idea he has seemed open-minded to the idea (although disinterested in talking about it).
To make the resolution objective, I'll specifically ask him if he agrees p(doom) is >= 5% and whether he agrees managing AI-risk should be a top 2% national policy priority, regardless of how the conversation goes, as long as it lasts more than 5minutes..
Will you share more about the planned framing / definition of p(doom)? Over what period of time?
Trying to avoid betting NO on anything that would count like the "...for jobs" Altman testimony from a year and change ago.
Are you talking like bio-x-risk or hard takeover, or softer human-mediated stuff like values lock in?