🏅 Top traders

Can you just resolve this and be done with it .

I think Q* counts. It wasn't an announcement from OpenAI, and the anonymous source doesn't even work at OpenAI(though they got their information from someone who does), but it did result in an announcement about OpenAI that was sudden and dramatic.

The announcement was exaggerated in importance, but that only enhances the drama:

If anyone wants to present an argument that the Q* reveal should count, they should do so now. I'm not aware of anything else that could reasonably count.

Argument against: the markets and credible reporting agree that Q* probably wasn't a factor in the board's decision

@IsaacKing In general I wouldn't call it an announcement, dramatic or not. It was a story from anonymous sources.

@jacksonpolack I don't see what that has to do with this market. Nowhere in the title or description does it mention the board's decision-making process.

@Joshua Hmm, wasn't the original reporting about being in talks to rehire Sam also more of a story than an official announcement?

@IsaacKing Well Sam announced that by tweeting about his being at OpenAI with the guest badge

We still don't actually know Q* or the letter exist, or if they were recent events.

@Joshua Are you saying that Twitter only gets into drama over things that are for sure true? :)

I think it's really obvious that Q* is 1/10th as dramatic as all your examples

@jacksonpolack I certainly saw a lot of excited Twitter coverage of the Q* thing. Maybe someone could do a count of how many tweets referenced each event?

@IsaacKing erm no counting tweets about rumours seems to be a very unscientific way to determine this. Currently Q* is purely conjecture and cannot qualify as an anouncement.

@BabyCoder "In talks to hire Sam Altman" was also a conjecture by news sources, was it not?

@IsaacKing well then if someone talked about open AI in a dramatic way on twitter it qualifies then your're right , resolve to Yes

So I was originally planning to not count it, but the fact that literally every argument presented in favor of NO so far has been terrible and made no sense is making me question whether that's correct.

Things that have qualified so far:

• Firing Sam Altman.

• Being in talks to rehire Sam Altman.

• Actually not rehiring Sam Altman after all.

• Actually actually rehiring Sam Altman for real this time.

it is not in the league of these things. this is obviously a vibes based judgement. not sure why you're expecting entirely clear separation on this

@IsaacKing Note to self don't bet on Mr Kings's questions again, his brain is too hard to predict .

wait the market says 'before november 26', but it closes during the night on nov 26. Does it include the duration of nov 26, or no?

@jacksonpolack It does not, I must have entered the wrong close date.

Actually actually rehiring sam - because their tweet says that the agreement is in principle for now?

Let's say Ilya resigns, does that count?

@Joshua The existing announcement strongly implies that, right? Since their new announced board does not include Ilya? If so, I'd say everyone's expecting that, so an explicit announcement of such wouldn't be very dramatic.

@IsaacKing He's off the board but not out of the company

@Joshua Ok, I think that would count then.