In 2100, I will distribute a poll among philosophers, superforecasters, AI professionals, superintelligences, and whatever other entities could reasonably be called "experts" to determine what probability they believe was correct to assign to the following statement in 2023:
Before 2075, humanity will be extinct or have suffered a fate worse than extinction, due to the effects of smarter-than-human artificial intelligence.
("Humanity" includes any non-biological successors that biological humans voluntarily turned into.)
1,000People are also trading
Related' let's find out how to survive
https://manifold.markets/Jono3h/why-did-ai-not-kill-us-before-2100
@MartinRandall Whoever is in charge of market resolution should perform the same experiment as closely to how I would have performed it as they can and resolve based on the results.
Regardless of the actual probability of the counterfactual, the hindsight bias will be enormous.
Especially since, if indeed AGI -> doom, then no doom -> no AGI, and polling taking place means no doom, so only lowly biased human will answer this poll.
@CamillePerrin I don't think it's widely accepted that it's impossible to have a non-genocidal AI. Also I think humans have estimated the risk of Cuban Missile Crisis etc al without enormous hindsight bias.
@jameso Humans are not very good reasoners, compared to the ideal.
What is this?
What is Manifold?
Are our predictions accurate?
Why use play money?
Why use play money?People are also trading
What is this?
What is Manifold?
Are our predictions accurate?
Why use play money?
Why use play money?