Have you tried booking time with her? Apparently you can just book time to talk: https://knowingless.com/lets-do-a-call/

Obviously not a "proper date" but at least a way to have an intro

My future wife is currently offering a $100k bounty to the individual that introduces her to me. To be clear, if I had $100k, I would use it to pay a group of intelligence analysts to rigorously interrogate @Aella in a (consensual) way that interpretably maps her internal epistemology for decentralized alignment and verification.

It's pretty hard to find chicks that are into getting philosophically interrogated by a room full of open source intelligence analysts.

If she is looking for deep probing questions that challenge her worldview, I've got em.

Someone please help her find me so we can take over the world.

If she finds me as a result of this prediction, I will recommend that she distribute the $100k proportionally across the individuals that supported my strategic correspondence by dumping it all as mana towards a "no" resolution for this prediction.

Thanks

@Krantz Given the specific metrics for this prediction, if @Aella looks at this as an analytic rationalist sapiosexual sex worker, if she is willing to give away $100k to a mechanism that finds her a husband, she should be willing to buy this down to a percentage equal to (her 24hr rate for sapiosexual work)/$100k.

So, $10k / day = 10%

$20k / day = 20%...

I am either a viable potential husband or a potential client that is just trying to pay for a service.

If only someone put it on her radar.

@Krantz heads up that sp**k is a racial slur in some contexts

https://www.oed.com/dictionary/spook_n?tl=true

Something something 2 nickels @crowlsyong

@TheAllMemeingEye It would be entertaining if somebody automated this bit with a bot account.

Btw @Krantz what is your unironic credence for this? It seems somewhat likely you might be betting non epistemically so far

@TheAllMemeingEye If my epistemology seems unsound to you, maybe you should map it in the form of a proper argument in the demonstration mechanism I'm trying to pay you to use.

@TheAllMemeingEye https://manifold.markets/Krantz/guessing-game-what-propositions-doe

@Krantz personally, my current credences are:

• P(Aella goes on a "proper date" with Krantz, i.e. "makes any half-way decent attempt to actually discuss the in-depth issue in private") = ~10%

• P(Aella will broadly agree with Krantz's AI alignment strategy, given the discussion) = ~10%

• P(Aella will marry Krantz, given the discussion) = ~0.1%

• P(Aella will have offspring with Krantz, given the discussion) = ~0.1%

• P(Aella will pivot her career to helping Krantz take control of the world, given the discussion) = ~1%

• P(all of the above) = ~0.01%

What would you say is the correct value for each?

@TheAllMemeingEye You forgot P(Successfully controlling the world with intellectual force)

@IsaacLinn arguably the title, start of description, and middle of description give 3 very different criteria.

Title

and control the world with intellectual force.

Start of description

and pivot her career to helping me demonstrably take control of the world using intellectual force.

Middle of description

Aella designates her formal employer as "krantz".

Your proposal applies to the first but not the other 2.

@TheAllMemeingEye These are great inquiries. I'm glad that you are trying to engage analytically to pin down my particular confidences on these particular propositions. That's something I wish more people would do.

I have to ask though, since the entire purpose of this prediction (along with nearly all of my predictions) is to teach this community how to use a particular mechanism to decentrally survey this specific form of information, why do you not simply use that mechanism to query my confidence as opposed to writing it out in the comments?

If you went to the krantz demonstration mechanism and added the following propositions:

1. Aella will go on a proper date with Krantz.

2. Aella will broadly agree with Krantz's alignment strategy.

3. Aella will marry Krantz.

4. Aella and Krantz will produce offspring.

5. Aella will use the Krantz mechanism to produce the majority of her income.

6. If 1, then 2.

7. If 1, then 3.

8. If 1, then 4.

9. If 1, then 5.

10. If 1, then (2, 3, 4 and 5).

If you did this, you would demonstrate that you understand the form of communication I am trying to teach the world how to use. You would also be able to view and operate on everyone's confidence for each proposition.

In general, it feels like a waste of time responding to everyone's cynical remarks in the comments section. If someone genuinely wanted to intellectually force me to update my priors, the obvious way to charitably do so would be through writing a valid argument within the krantz mechanism that compells me to confront any possible contradictions publicly.

Nobody seems capable of doing that.

@Krantz Here's a bounty for anyone capable of intellectually forcing me to update my priors (about any topic you'd like) using the mechanism I keep advocating for.

https://manifold.markets/Krantz/will-anyone-write-an-argument-that

@Krantz

since the entire purpose of this prediction (along with nearly all of my predictions) is to teach this community how to use a particular mechanism to decentrally survey this specific form of information, why do you not simply use that mechanism to query my confidence as opposed to writing it out in the comments?

[...]

If someone genuinely wanted to intellectually force me to update my priors, the obvious way to charitably do so would be through writing a valid argument within the krantz mechanism that compells me to confront any possible contradictions publicly.

If you want more people to understand and try to use your mechanism, then my recommendation is the same as I commented in your other market:

Could you write a 1-3 paragraph layman language explanation of the Krantz mechanism?

i.e. don't use any phrases you wouldn't expect an average English speaking person to already understand, certainly don't use any phrases you've invented or redefined, do a Toki-Pona-ing / Yudkowskian-tabooing ( https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/WBdvyyHLdxZSAMmoz/taboo-your-words ) if need be. Existing explanations you've shared seem to be either extremely long or include a bunch of opaque invented/redefined language e.g. krantz-x, constitution, ledger, collective intelligence etc.

For this prediction, "proper date" means "spend at least 24 hours charitably questioning each other's philosophy inside a SCIF (secured compartmentalized information facility)".

A couple questions:

• Why call this a "proper date"? This seems to be highly at odds with the intuitive definition

• Is this 24h continuous, with no breaks, not even for eating or sleeping? If there are breaks, what's the maximum length and frequency?

• What even is a secured compartmentalized information facility? Does it mean a university building with security guards?

@TheAllMemeingEye for the last one, I think he means this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitive_compartmented_information_facility

@LiamZ thanks for the explanation 👍

It raises the follow-up question of whether krantz would count informal improvised attempts at making one (e.g. a room with civilian soundproofing and checked for bugs) or would he only count one officially designated as such by a government or military?

@TheAllMemeingEye I am going to be more than happy to resolve this if any half-way decent attempt is made by @Aella to actually discuss an in depth issue in private.

@Krantz Or NO, if you don't satisfy the other three conditions. Right?

@LiamZ Im glad we now know that no one has ever gone on a serious date ever

Free loan market though

@Gurkenglas on his Elizier market he actually got the guy to engage but he still refuses to resolve it. It would likely be similar here, if she rejects him it's not going to mean “NO” but rather that it “wasn't a proper date.”

@LiamZ good point

@Krantz can you confirm that you are indeed willing to resolve no in such cases and won't shift the goal posts?

@TheAllMemeingEye ignoring this is not surprising but pretty funny.

42%‽ That's an insanely high probabili- oh right

@TheAllMemeingEye All things considered, if Aella actually does go on this date as the prior condition necessary for this market, it probably means she has done her homework on Krantz, and he likely has something going for him.

Basically, this market forces us to consider a world where Aella is in a state of mind to consider what Krantz has to offer, regardless of our difficulty to fathom it.

I think a range of 50±25% looks fair to me.

@Quroe I think it's reasonably likely that if she has her curiosity stirred then she may investigate via the "date" (basically just a convo based on the description and comments) but end up disappointed. Also she has extremely high standards for actually becoming her husband e.g. she wants someone richer than her (the most highly paid sex worker in the world in her own words), she says she only meets someone she's physically attracted to once every several years etc.

@TheAllMemeingEye I guess this market mostly hinges on how she decides to go on dates, then. It seems like there is some due diligence performed, at least for larger events. (Hey Krantz, you're not affiliated or aligned with e/acc, are you?)

@Quroe

With my approval, organizers rejected anyone associated with e/acc, because we don’t need to give nice things to people hastening our doom.

Haha I forgot about that

@Quroe The fact that you would ask if I am 'e/acc' seems to indicate you haven't taken the time to review my beliefs at all.

I'm much more likely to be hanging out with the folks that are chaining themselves to the gates of OpenAI. My views on existential risk are probably most similar to someone like Roman Yampolskiy. I attended Manifest last year and found myself sitting at the end of the line when we sorted ourselves by pdoom (mine was highest). Although I believe I would update that belief if I were able to successfully inject my ideas into the public domain.

However, I believe the theatrics of 'promoting X risk' are a terrible waste of effective altruism.

What is actually needed are mechanistically interpretable breakthroughs in symbolic gofai that allow the scale participation of the masses in defining decentralized parity.

We need a breakthrough in work similar to the work of Doug Lenat and Daniel Hillis. Work like that could render the insane scaling being done by folks like Sam Altman and Larry Ellison irrelevant and unnecessary.

What scares me, is you guys (the 20 yr old autistic cadre in SF) don't seem to be familiar with or ever speak about the plethora of research that has been done in the 70s, 80s and 90s in gofai. You are blinded by your narrow focus on machine learning because that is what scares you (as it rightly should). You are trying to solve the wrong problem and completely ignorant to the layer of manipulation applied to you by intelligence agencies.

You should instead be talking about how gofai could be paired with the work from folks like Balaji Srinivasan (I'm highly aligned with the network state) to create futarich governance structures that make money and ML based creativity obsolete.

@Aella rejecting me because I don't have access to enough US dollars to buy her time or her not being physically attracted to me would be a mistake in judging my value.

I am a retired minimalist philosopher. I used to be a casino director. I managed multiple properties and had plenty of money. Then, I retired to become a minimalist autodidact and studied QFT, mathematics, gofai, philosophy, economics and the history of intelligence work (open source intelligence).

I found value outside of money.

I found value in wisdom and love.

I was married for 17 years and raised two kids (now 22 and 16). I was a cub scout leader for 100s of kids in my local community. I was retired and enjoyed a simple life. That all changed when AI took off.

I want to marry Aella because I need a partner.

I am looking for a woman that is resilient enough to handle the intelligence I have gathered.

If you take my other predictions seriously (and I really wish you would) hopefully you can see that a marriage with Aella is an instrumental step of a much more ambitious goal.

If she just wants money, I still have an incredible amount of valuable property in the crypto space that very few people in the world understand. She would need to reach out privately to find out what that is.

Please. I beg all of you to simply help me make her aware of me. If I could make it back out to lessonline this year, I could have a conversation with her that would increase her own status in the world orders of magnitude. But more importantly, we could get Yud's pdoom down to <10%.

@Krantz

What scares me, is you guys (the 20 yr old autistic cadre in SF)

Hey how DARE you imply that I'm American 😡

@Krantz

I am a retired minimalist philosopher. I used to be a casino director. I managed multiple properties and had plenty of money. Then, I retired to become a minimalist autodidact and studied QFT, mathematics, gofai, philosophy, economics and the history of intelligence work (open source intelligence).

I sure hope that you post-philosophy ethically condemns you pre-philosophy, in the vast majority of cases being a casino director is basically equivalent to being a drug lord or loan shark in terms of social damage, except legal, and if you think that's ok then I'm vastly more sceptical that you can be remotely trusted to align a superintelligence.

@Krantz

I want to marry Aella because I need a partner.

I am looking for a woman that is resilient enough to handle the intelligence I have gathered.

If you take my other predictions seriously (and I really wish you would) hopefully you can see that a marriage with Aella is an instrumental step of a much more ambitious goal.

Ok, but has it occurred to you that, even if we assume that your plan for AI alignment and collective intelligence is pure genius that would definitely work (technically possible but I suspect unlikely), trying to launch your movement by demanding a famous and much younger female sex researcher marry you and have children with you is funny if ironic but creepy and outright insane strategically if unironic? Like on the same level as Elon Musk telling Taylor Swift to have his kids that one time

@Krantz I am by no means an expert, but intuitively I think a vastly more effective strategy would be something like:

1. Publicly apologise to Eliezer Yudkowsky, Aella, and the Manifold community in general for having been so obsessive and pushy about your ideas, and truthfully promise to be more humble and cooperative moving forward.

2. Build a reputation for being humorous and likable so that people emotionally want to listen to your ideas.

3. Write a highly accessible and engaging layman introduction to your ideas, share it online, take and incorporate constructive criticism.

4. If the idea still seems good, write more full and rigorous academic papers about your ideas, upload a preprint to arxiv, and submit tailored versions to peer reviewed scientific journals of multiple different levels of prestige.

5. If the reception is good, continue doing research and academic papers and abridged layman blog posts on the subject.

6. If it really takes off, then start considering trying to get media attention, doing interviews, writing pop science books etc.

Do you get where I'm going with this? I'm sure I'm missing stuff but the general direction makes more sense than what you've been doing, right?

@Quroe also important

Note that this is referring to support of powerful people and/or the general population, NOT sexual partners

@LiamZ I see hints of types 3 and 4 but I don't think it's full blown yet, he might be saveable.

Arguably I occasionally suffer from mild aspects of 4 and 12, there's nothing to be ashamed of in admitting one has a problem.

@TheAllMemeingEye you have to remember there’s beliefs in the CIA will target him if he reveals his secret algorithm, the intelligence agencies are trying to discredit his ideas through twitter porn bots replying to his tweets, Jesus is returning soon, aliens are behind LK99 and it’s real, autistic people are telepathic, the Mexican alien bodies are real and will be published in a scientific journal soon, the New Jersey drones were magic orbs summoned through the power of meditation, a new Nobel prize will be created just for him, he will take control of the world, and more.

@LiamZ lol what?

@Krantz can you confirm whether these are your true beliefs?

@TheAllMemeingEye Look at his trading history.

@TheAllMemeingEye Also, this.

https://x.com/therealkrantz/status/1764713384790921355

@TheAllMemeingEye ok, it’s not just the orbs themselves:

@LiamZ Send me a link to that market. I want in on that action.

@Quroe https://manifold.markets/10thOfficial/what-will-be-true-about-the-mystery?r=TGlhbVo

@Quroe

I want in on that action.

Also to be clear, I do not think Krantz is a bad person or should be bullied. I told him previously I would stop commenting but I genuinely think he needs to talk to a professional and listen to any feedback he is receiving from his children, ex wife, etc. because if his story is true he’s made huge financial sacrifices already as a result of these beliefs and this story easily could end tragically.

@LiamZ yeah I do worry for his wellbeing sometimes