Will "Some background for reasoning about dual-use ..." make the top fifty posts in LessWrong's 2023 Annual Review?

Mini

0

2025

14%

chance

1D

1W

1M

ALL

As part of LessWrong's Annual Review, the community nominates, writes reviews, and votes on the most valuable posts. Posts are reviewable once they have been up for at least 12 months, and the 2023 Review resolves in February 2025.

This market will resolve to 100% if the post Some background for reasoning about dual-use alignment research is one of the top fifty posts of the 2023 Review, and 0% otherwise. The market was initialized to 14%.

Get Ṁ600 play money

## More related questions

## Related questions

Will "Toward A Mathematical Framework for Computati..." make the top fifty posts in LessWrong's 2024 Annual Review?

59% chance

Will "What a compute-centric framework says about A..." make the top fifty posts in LessWrong's 2023 Annual Review?

34% chance

Will "Towards Developmental Interpretability" make the top fifty posts in LessWrong's 2023 Annual Review?

69% chance

Will "Attitudes about Applied Rationality" make the top fifty posts in LessWrong's 2024 Annual Review?

43% chance

Will "Fact Finding: Attempting to Reverse-Engineer ..." make the top fifty posts in LessWrong's 2023 Annual Review?

53% chance

Will "How useful is mechanistic interpretability?" make the top fifty posts in LessWrong's 2023 Annual Review?

25% chance

Will "Against Almost Every Theory of Impact of Inte..." make the top fifty posts in LessWrong's 2023 Annual Review?

28% chance

Will "Many arguments for AI x-risk are wrong" make the top fifty posts in LessWrong's 2024 Annual Review?

22% chance

Will "A rough and incomplete review of some of John..." make the top fifty posts in LessWrong's 2023 Annual Review?

24% chance

Will "Against LLM Reductionism" make the top fifty posts in LessWrong's 2023 Annual Review?

21% chance