🏅 Top traders

I'm reading this as a dual set of conditions:

• Will we finally pull ourselves together

AND

• avoid being wiped out by AI?

I can definitely say we didn't meet the 2nd condition. We're not dead. I guess we avoided being wiped out before market close.

I don't think we've hit the first condition yet, though.

This seems like a defensible NO to me. Let me know if anybody disagrees.

@Quroe oh when I read this question I did not think it had a deadline, as none was mentioned.

@jack Do we imply a deadline from the close date if none are mentioned?

@Quroe this is one of the top ambiguities that is the bane of our existence. There is no clear consensus either way.

@jack I vote for defaulting a deadline to market close here unless otherwise specified.

Let's assume we don't operate like that here. In this particular case, it would sound like this market either resolves YES, or it stays open indefinitely until it resolves NO when nobody cares anymore because we are all dead. In that case, all humans trading this market should only be willing to buy YES shares because there is no utility to gain and exercise in the NO worldline.

From what I read, the market creator had a "you guys should figure this out -- I don't care" mindset. And as much as I hate that, the author's intent is being fulfilled.

@Quroe strong agree

Hot damn. If we had waited one more day to resolve this, it would have been more contentious.

---

Sam Altman says OpenAI will match Anthropic’s new AI safety commitment, Musk says ‘Dario is right’

https://ground.news/article/artificial-intelligence-out-of-control-anthropic-launches-appeal-slow-down-musk-and-altman-agree?utm_source=mobile-app&utm_medium=newsroom-share

@Quroe thanks for saving my mana :)

@Quroe It could also have resolved no if we somehow made it without meeting the criteria, e.g. we just get lucky. And there are plenty of other markets in the AI safety space that have the problem of not being around to collect your winnings.

I don't really care personally, in part because it was so underspecified in the first place, but if other people care I'd suggest n/a

@jack also that exact problem was brought up 1y ago, implying that others did read it as not having the 1y deadline. And the author even replied to the question, although the reply didn't exactly clarify this point.

@jack That's what I interpreted as the 'you guys should figure this out -- I don't care' mindset above.

resolves no

@mods inactive creator

We wont be wiped out by AI. Pausing worldwide AI development is as impossible as pausing worldwide coding. Any sort of pause has to be significant to resolve as Yes, not just one big company pausing or an agreement to pause in theroy.

@AlanTennant "Any other effective method also accepted" not pausing and getting alignment right would resolve YES

@AlanTennant if there were only 10 serious coders of concern in the world, and coding required 10,000 homes worth of electricity usage and teams of 50>, I don't think it would be that hard to pause.

This market doesn’t make any sense

title is very misleading vs. content, content is very ambiguous, especially 'Any other effective method also accepted'

@BogdanIonutCirstea how would you put it?

Can this market ever resolve NO? If you are alive then humanity hasn't been wiped out

@brubsby criteria mentioned in description

@Mjd how does this resolve if no such measures are taken yet we aren't wiped out?

What is the criteria for this?

@EliH added