Scott recently wrote about Luria asking questions to some Uzbek peasants in the 1930s here: The thing is, Kyrgyz and Uzbeks (after 80 years of mass literacy) are not exactly high in the IQ department TODAY -Kyrgyz scored around the equivalent of 75 on the 2009 PISA. Given it would be trivial for someone to visit Central Asia today (Kyrgyzstan would be easiest for a number of reasons), would Luria's observations replicate today? Resolves if someone travels to Uzbekistan/Kyrgyzstan/Tajikistan/southern Kazakhstan with this intention after I've posted this question and writes a detailed account of his observations. If the observations do not replicate Luria's at all, this question will resolve No. If they strongly replicate, it will resolve Yes. If it's a mixture, it will resolve to % on the basis of the agreement with Luria's observations.
Get Ṁ600 play money
Sort by:
predicts NO
Seem like the base rate for sufficiently interesting findings to replicate is low enough as it is.
As for the AI discussion in the comments of the SSC post, I find most of it funny. It's primarily focusing on irrelevancies while ignoring actually useful stuff. Thus my market here (actually useful): I have two tests for AGI: if it can pass the Turing test and if it can identify any object presented to it. Whether these can be answered by scale is an empirical question.