Frankly, I'm glad. Some of you are way too addicted to AI hype. No AI video is close to as good as this.

@TiredCliche That's what all the old folks who share AI videos on Facebook all think as well.

Creator is inactive, 3 mod panel (me bagelfan Eliza) agreed to resolve N/A

@nikki lol seems clearly no?

If it’s ambiguous then it’s no

@AlexanderLeCampbell the market resolves to OP's subjective opinion (I expected a YES resolution). But OP isn't here, so N/A is the only sensible resolution.

@nikki I’m very disappointed in you guys.

@nikki I'm very proud of you guys.

@nikki Can you close the rest of George's markets or reassign them or do something to avoid more cases like this?

This market is a mess. It's another example of bad markets with ambiguous resolution criteria gaining high visibility and lots of trader bonuses, because the market is bad, because the criteria are ambiguous.

Those markets should resolve N/A (and also be re-resolved to N/A by the mods if the creator resolves one way or the other) to disincentivize creation of such toxic markets. This is the prediction market equivalent of clickbait.

Disclaimer: I had been trading in this market under the assumption (meaning it was absolutely obvious to me that's the only reasonable interpretation)

Another way of interpreting it is whether or not Eliezer's tweet still holds up at the end of 2024 i.e. his prediction still seems on track.

but am not holding a position anymore.

@Primer Agree with your meta point, but not your interpretation of the market.

@VitorBosshard Thanks. The meta point only stands if we can agree there are different reasonable interpretations. I think a different interpretation from mine is reasonable. If you agree my interpretation is reasonable, we agree on the meta point 😂

@Primer Your interpretation is wrong, according to the market creator.

@Primer This market is only hotly disputed because the criterion are clearly very close to being met. If the resolution date had been a year ago it would have been an obvious NO. If you make a new market with the same criteria, but resolving 5 years in the future, I'll happily bet it up to 90% YES. GeorgeVii happened to have the misfortune of picking a close date 1 month after the release of Veo2 and X months before the release of Sora17 or whatever.

Markets that resolve to subjective judgement are great, there just needs to be some pre-agreed mechanism for handling ambiguity. If I were to make a market like this now, I'd put in the description that it resolves to coin flip if it's too close to subjectively call.

@placebo_username Having mechanisms such as coinflips in specific conditions for a market resolution distorts the market.

@ScipioFabius (1) "Distorting the market" relative to the title seems fine, so long as the resolution plan is clear from the beginning. (2) In this specific case the distortion seems pretty minimal, since (a) the coinflip is unlikely to happen and (b) in cases in which the coinflip happens, the pre-distortion market should have been kinda close to 50-50 anyways, because the facts on the ground were ambiguous enough that it came down to the whim of the creator.

Situation update:

So far, SirSalty attempted to email the creator and got no response. He also attempted to contact the creator via Discord and got no response yet.

If @GeorgeVii doesn't show up, the next step on the Mod Guidelines resolution flow (see "If the close date has been reached, and the resolution is ambiguous") for this situation looks like "If 3 out of 3 mods unanimously agree to resolve one way, do that. Otherwise, resolve N/A."

So far, it's been about a month. @Jacy has presented a valid concern that waiting much longer will impact the resolution because "as of the end of 2024" will be cloudy in anyone's mind.

I feel like we cannot wait an entire year in this case, but it also seems like we need to respect the 100s of traders who traded on GeorgeVii's "subjective perception" who might instead be graded on "3 out of 3 mods' subjective perception".

@Eliza thanks! I want to add (in trader capacity, not mod capacity) that just as we should respect those who traded on GeorgeVii's "subjective perception" who might instead be graded on "3 out of 3 mods' subjective perception", we should respect those who saw it was an inactive market creator and traded on "3 out of 3 mods' subjective perception" who might instead be graded on GeorgeVii's "subjective perception".

@Eliza If this is the case, open it back up to trading. It's not what I signed up for.

@Predictor I'd rather see arguments from users who actually own shares in this market. If you're just interested in finding out the answer, maybe you could host another similar market.

@Eliza i vote to just N/A it, as it can't be resolved to OP judgment. (for context i have 500 mana of yes here)

@Eliza Just texted the market creator after realising that I actually know them quite well (should have… traded on that insider info…)

@JonathanMannhart Did the market creator respond to you?

Well??????

@Lavander The market creator hasn't made a trade on Manifold for almost 3 months. Likely the @mods have to deal with this market some way or another.

@FlorisvanDoorn Ironically, 4/5 top NO holders are mods, so we have a slight conflict of interest here.