If he will solve, but will not win $000 000?

$000 000 is what he gets if he doesn't solve

https://manifold.markets/KyleY/if-davidbudden-uploaded-something-t

https://arxiv.org/localtime - I'm not terribly familiar with the arxiv process, but assuming the paper was submitted before EOY, my understanding is that we should expect to see it by Jan 5th 01:00 UTC

I assume that the market resolves yes if he doesn't upload a paper purporting to contain a full proof by midnight UTC+0, which has elapsed?

@ArnavRawat

@JakobBrunker a man of sight!

@ArnavRawat The original bet didn't specify a time zone, so personally I think the terms would be satisfied if David uploads it before the year is out in any time zone. (Of course, I am not the arbiter of the original bet, Marcus and David may disagree.)

I suppose we can assume the "during the calendar year 2025" stipulation applies based on the UTC+0 timezone? Not many hours left!

If no time zone is specified it can also mean AoE (12 hours more left than UTC)

@retr0id I could totally be wrong, but I'd be surprised if any of these tiny timing details ended up mattering. My actual guess is that if David Budden tweets the Lean file out a few hours after midnight, and then uploaded a paper to arxiv tomorrow or the day after, and the Clay institute accepted it, then probably Hutter would just concede the bet. I could be wrong, I don't know Hutter, but I think it would be a very reasonable choice to be like "the real thing I was wildly skeptical of is if you'll prove it this year, and you actually did". (But Hutter sticking to the text as written would also be reasonable, to be clear, I just don't expect it.)

@PeterSchmidtNielsen yeah I can imagine there being some leeway if he's actually solved it. although at this point it just looks like he's going to stall indefinitely

@retr0id yeah, solving it is the hard part. If it's close enough for us to be quibbling over time zones, and it's actually solved I'm not mad if it resolves that way.

Derivative market: https://manifold.markets/Simon74fe/will-the-david-budden-navierstokes

gl;hf

@DavidBudden Have a link to the paper? The link in the tweet doesn't seem to work for me

@DavidBudden do you have a schedule in mind for the rest of the releases?

ok i am just hypergambling here bc i had a few thousand mana from years ago but my general thesis around bets like this is that it will at some point become extremely +EV to become a degenerate punter if superintelligence actually starts to arrive

the vast majority of humanity including expert predictors are so accustomed to baseline human intelligence and what it is capable of (including genius intelligences) that if AI starts to do spooky stuff it will be a moment for immense wealth creation for those who are willing to bet on "impossible" outcomes

@JohnFish Yeah but surely even in that scenario it's more likely to come from a serious team first?

@IsaacKing of course. but they also might look a lot like david: ex frontier lab directors leaving to hack on their own. fwiw i do not think he will solve any millenium problem in the next calendar year but i think 1:20 is a fair price to start betting fake money at

@JohnFish for me the odds I'd take would be the same regardless of money-fakeness, but it's possible I take manifold too seriously. I put the true probability of his success somewhere <1% and round it up for simplicity (and so I think I have a few % edge on my bets).

@retr0id yes we are probably different because i am not an active manifold trader anymore as i have moved on to real money prediction markets.

in a real money prediction market i would simply not bet here because it is a potential 2y resolution (if budden contests that he is correct and hutter does not concede) for a few% payoff so you'd be much better off in other markets or bonds

Just one year I think.

@IsaacKing Seems like a relevant fine print is that Budden needs to upload a paper to arXiv by EoY 2025, and AFAICT he hasn't yet done so. If it's clear in a month that there's no paper on arXiv can this resolve early?

@BoltonBailey Yeah I was thinking about that. The problem is that they could still call the bet off after that. Seems pretty unlikely though, so I'm open to it.

@IsaacKing Functionally, what's the difference between one magnanimously letting the other off the hook, and them "calling it off" after one's victory condition has occurred?

@ElliotGlazer Yeah I think if one side has clearly won, this should resolve. (But it must be "clear" relative to the initial odds, so the current situation is not enough.)