Will a donor who is not currently widely known in effective altruism, longtermism, or existential risk give ≥$50 million to longtermist or existential risk causes or organizations before the end of 2024, and be expected to continue giving ≥$50 million per year?
I will only count donations or grants, not impact investments. I will count something as a longtermist if it seems like the kind of thing the Long-Term Future Fund or Open Phil's longtermist budget might plausibly fund. I will resolve this question at my discretion in whichever way seems most correct to me. I may trade in this market, but promise to carefully make sure not to let my position affect the way I resolve this market.
I assume this would have to be public knowledge for this to resolve positively? I.e. even if you were personnally hear about such a donor, you wouldn't resolve positively unless it was okay for this information to be public? (Might be good to commit to that now.)
@MathieuPutz If I personally heard about the donor but it wasn't public knowledge, I would resolve positively, possibly without naming the donor, if I thought that doing so was okay given the confidentiality under which I acquired that information. Otherwise I would resolve negatively even if I knew of an additional donor.
E.g., it might be the case that a donor is somewhat widely known in the EA community, but doesn't have a website or other public posts or media articles about their giving. In this case, I would resolve positively without naming the donor if I knew about them.
