In the event that you resolve this market, can you please describe what criteria you will use? For example, how would you resolve if the stated goal of the super PAC is to limit or regulate data centers, develop safety regulation, or codify legal liability? On the surface, these policies do not seem anti-AI, but anti-AI individuals would support such policies as a stepping stone to more extreme policies. Will you also consider the mission statement of the super PAC or personal statements of donors or organizers? Making a determination might be tricky, and I wish the authors

@dfish Those seem like they'd probably be anti-AI, though of course it depends on the details. If the legal liability they're trying to codify is "none", that seems pro-AI!

@IsaacKing, thank you for your response. I wanted some clarification because people likely have different definitions of anti-AI, which would affect the market probabilities. My initial thought was that those examples do not necessarily qualify as anti-AI, much in the same way that safety regulation for cars are not necessarily anti-car. I was thinking of more extreme examples, such as an explicit ban of AI or imposing restrictions that would render the development or use of AI impractical. Ultimately what is important is that increasing the number of conditions that lead to a resolution of yes should increase the market price (or at least not decrease it).