Background
Genius is typically characterized by exceptional intellectual ability, creativity, and innovative thinking. While IQ tests can measure certain aspects of intelligence, true genius often manifests through a combination of traits including deep curiosity, abstract thinking, pattern recognition, and the ability to make novel connections across disciplines.
Resolution Criteria
This market will resolve YES if any user posts a reply that convincingly demonstrates genius-level capabilities, as judged by the market creator. This could be through:
Solving a complex mathematical or scientific problem in an innovative way
Demonstrating profound insights that reveal deep understanding across multiple fields
Presenting original theories or ideas that show exceptional intellectual capability
Making novel connections or observations that display remarkable pattern recognition
The market will resolve NO if no replies meet this threshold of convincing demonstration of genius.
Considerations
Genius is subjective and can manifest in many forms beyond traditional academic intelligence
Simply claiming high IQ or listing accomplishments may not be sufficient - the response should demonstrate genius-level thinking in action
The market creator's judgment of what constitutes "convincing" evidence of genius will be the determining factor
Plagiarized or AI-generated responses will not qualify for YES resolution
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ27 | |
| 2 | Ṁ8 | |
| 3 | Ṁ7 | |
| 4 | Ṁ7 | |
| 5 | Ṁ6 |
Instrumental convergence disproves the orthogonality thesis.
The law of diminishing marginal utility fails once we develop the technology to create artificial time environments.
One of our most foolish errors as a species was failing to pursue eugenics (we still should, but it's probably too late to matter).
Bitcoin solves the problem of spacetime.
@jim I don't think instrumental convergence has much to do with orthogonality? Instrumental convergence as I understand it is about sub-goals in pursuit of other goals; in reinforcement learning terminology, it's a thesis concerning the policy, while orthogonality is concerned with the reward function.
@jim I actually don't think taking humanity's goal as a collective entity is a good approach (and I'm not even confident it's coherent), and optimizing for it predictably creates awful misaligned dystopias. I would favor treating each individual moral patient as a separate entity and optimizing their values.
If you held me at gunpoint and forced me to answer that question, one approach that doesn't seem completely doomed would be something like a more functional version of capitalism, where each participant has their own values and makes exchanges with others (who have different values). Humans are not very good at modeling their own values, or the effects of their actions, but that's something that could probably be solved with advanced brain technology and limitless compute.
@SaviorofPlant humanity is an intelligence, why wouldn't it have a goal. Also, it follows Omohundro Drives which don't seem in any relevant sense to be sub-goals. If anything its actual goal is so obscured. So if Omohundro dominates, where is orthogonality?
@diadematus only one of the points is edgelord midwittery, and that's exactly why I included it. Proof that I judge positions by how strong they are, not by whether they are generally arrived at by sound argument (which would of course be the fallacy fallacy...)