I'll randomly sample an original post from AISafetyMemes on twitter that was released in 2024 and is still up and go into detail about the each of the claims made.
If the tweet makes no verifiable claims of interest, then I'll resample.
Then I'll resolve this market to "yes" if I find no substantial falsehood.
This might become vibes-based, but I will default to the literal interpretation of the words and I won't be eager to mark predictions as false if AISafetyMemes flagged those as a predictions or speculation.
Not only is the point of this market to evaluate AISafetyMemes, but also to evaluate our community (or the part that visits manifold) on whether they unfairly state that AISafetyMemes is "right" or "wrong".
And, be encouraged to duplicate my market, but with you, or some poll, as the judge, so any conversation about the account can become better guided.
Reminder that I will only sample a single tweet and the resolution has zero say about the unsampled tweets. Most of the interestingness here is to be gained from the number the traders come up with before resolution.
Update 2025-15-01 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - Only original tweets will be sampled; replies are excluded except when adding context to the original tweet.
Sample size considerations: While a larger sample size (e.g., 5 or 10 tweets) is acknowledged as beneficial for engagement, the current market will not change the resolution criteria mid-market. Future markets may adopt a larger sample size.
1,000
3.00@AlvaroCuba No replies, except to add context to their original tweet.
I think you're right in the larger sample size. I don't want to change the resolution mid-market but in the future I will.
@Jono3h This is the kind of thing I see a lot: https://x.com/AISafetyMemes/status/1879938756334977117?t=jjmO7bL4Gm-uUxfBqfXu1A&s=19
It's just quotes & they're reported accurately.
He exaggerates but mostly at a high-level such that it's hard to find a specific inaccurate detail. FWIW, I think it's reasonable for him to tweet as he does. Not everyone has to be the cautious and reserved voice of reason, but audience capture is a thing. I would trade very differently depending on whether the resolution criteria were: "is it possible to find something incorrect" vs "is it mostly benign exaggeration".
@WilliamGunn Yeah, as it stands this market feels more like a shot in the dark. Leaning towards YES after sampling some of their tweets at random, they tend to be misleading but more or less factually correct, at least at the level of granularity I expect this market to care about.
@MingCat @WilliamGunn I think you're both saying that most discussion around AISM has to do with their optics, with which I agree.
But before you can debate optics it makes sense to first see if you're being lied to.
And even then, I wouldn't know how to quantify that aspect in a way cheap enough for me to do without getting payed for it, yet interesting enough to justify its own existence.
@Jono3h That seems fair. Would you be willing to provide a AISafetyMemes tweet that you think does qualify as being factually incorrect, as a baseline for your judgment?
@MingCat No, I want to do an in-depth look into each of the claims made, which I think will take up so much time that I don't want to do it multiple times.