Will AI be used in 2024 to brute-force a solution to a longstanding medical problem?

Tracking predictions from the podcast Oh No, Ross and Carrie! episode 399. Transcript available at https://maximumfun.org/transcripts/oh-no-ross-and-carrie/transcript-oh-no-ross-and-carrie-ep-399-ross-carrie-and-psychics-predict-2024-cancer-cures-and-election-edition/

Ross Blocher: [...]You know, I feel like a lot of our predictors were onto something with AI solving a big problem. ‘Cause they keep throwing things at it, like give us potential materials. I was reading an article about this, and they just sort of extrapolated from potential combinations of atoms and said, “Here’s a bunch of materials you haven’t tried yet.” And so, I’m sure much cool stuff will come of that. So, I’m going to say—and I feel like some of our predictors had a very similar prediction, but I’ll say AI is used to brute-force a solution to a longstanding medical problem.

I will resolve according to their evaluation in 2025 ("No" for a zero on their scale, "N/A" for one, and "Yes" for two)

Get Ṁ600 play money
Sort by:

Does it have to be specifically a brute force? The quote doesn't read that way and AI doesn't work that way

I was going to post these to manifold (I have some psychic predictions I've put up on my own), and I want to register as being glad that you did so!

I don't think resolving to N/A if they give a "1" is a good idea though, it makes the markets less bettable, as they tend to give a "1" to anything that seems obvious or easily predictable.

@Mad They also give 1’s to partially true predictions, like maybe solving a small medical problem rather than huge. I also feel the N/A is so probable that I would rather not lock in for a solid yes or no 😃

@SusanneinFrance yeah agreed, they tend to give a lot of 1s.

bought Ṁ10 NO

Used *successfully*? Or is an attempt sufficient?

@SonataGreen I assume that a mere attempt wouldn't count, but I will defer to Ross and Carrie's own interpretation for resolution.

More related questions