Will anybody born before 2000 live to be 150?

Time spent uploaded counts, but only real time, not simulated time. If reanimated from cryonic storage, only the time they spent "alive" counts.

Get Ṁ600 play money
Sort by:
bought Ṁ50 NO

Since I don't think one year makes much difference these two markets can be arbitraged.

bought Ṁ26 of YES

It's very likely that ASI will happen within our lifetimes. Aging is very likely to be cured a few years before or after ASI, if it doesn't kill us.

bought Ṁ100 of NO

@JonathanRay what % do you put at this, considering it's never happened?

predicts NO

@JonathanRay cool, thanks (I'd put something in that range too, +- 5%)

predicts YES

The year is 2150. All actively alive people born before 2000 are dead. But there are a lot of stockpiled cryopreserved such people, and it's still uncertain if they can be resurrected. How this market should resolve?

predicts YES

@Lavander It doesn't resolve, since we don't know the correct resolution yet.

@IsaacKing Can you give me any scenario in which this market resolves NO? I don't see any reasonable way. All humans being wiped out doesn't mean that it's impossible to simulate humans.

This makes the title of this market bad/misleading.

predicts YES

@FlorisvanDoorn If all humans experience information-theoretic death, this resolves NO.

predicts YES

I'm born around 2000.

So it can't resolve NO in a timeline when I'm still alive. I'm willing to transfer mana from hypothetical timelines where i'm already dead to timelines where I'm still alive.

It's just as AI apocalypse market for me in this regard, mana is practically worthless in NO-resolution world.

predicts YES

@Lavander Sure, but that won't be the case for other people, so the market probability has a force towards accuracy here, unlike the AI market.

predicts YES


Well, (a guess) 60% of people here have incentive to bet it to 100% then.

And the others have just a bit weaker incentive, but they still do, because i think it has strong correlation with their continued lives too.

And loans make it kinda tempting

predicts YES


predicts YES

Steve Austad made a very similar prediction

sold Ṁ221 of NO
predicts YES

@firstuserhere I'd love to see this graph extended further backwards.

@firstuserhere The plateu in maximum lifespan is due to life extension beyond 125 years requiring changes to the mechanisms of our biology.

By changing the inputs into our biology and spreading those more equitably we can push the average towards the maximum but never change the maximum.

bought Ṁ100 of YES

Some strong opinions from @firstuserhere

bought Ṁ5 of NO

@IsaacKing will any manifold user live to know?

bought Ṁ20 of NO

See also:

bought Ṁ30 of NO

@IsaacKing just don't think it's 60% likely that someone already around 25 years of age will (after all the exposure to the environment of today) will be alive in 2149

predicts NO

@firstuserhere but ofc I'd love to be the one who satisfies this market hahaha

predicts NO

@firstuserhere (i qualify very very barely)

@firstuserhere I think even the R&D towards active learning via attempting to produce ASI by 2050 or earlier would be enough to make me less skeptical on that matter. I don't think exposure to the environment compares much to the idea-space and complexity theory via new theories of computation within the next 20 years, AI aided or not. Curious about a deep dive into your thoughts on this.