Resolves to TRUE if there is conclusive evidence at any point before the resolution date that the claimed capabilities are false or greatly exaggerated to the point of being deceptive.
See this twitter thread for a description of the model: https://twitter.com/fablesimulation/status/1681352904152850437
And the responses to this tweet for some claims that it is fake: https://twitter.com/mezaoptimizer/status/1681685697743159296
To be clear, this is about the model itself, not about eg: false information in the company's website not related to the model.
I realize the resolution criteria is very vague, I will use my best judgement to resolve the market.
Related questions
π Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | αΉ176 | |
| 2 | αΉ26 | |
| 3 | αΉ15 | |
| 4 | αΉ12 | |
| 5 | αΉ4 |
@PabloVillalobos227d I'm pretty sure this resolves NO. I've been checking news and social media and haven't seen anyone even mention SHOW-1 in the last few weeks. It's clear that the people that claimed this software was fake were just confused by their simulated corporation.
@RobertCousineau why would they need to edit the story line? There's been 325 South Park episodes.
@RobertCousineau the episodes weren't that impressive. They were on par with what you can do with a trained LLM right now. The characters were written with all their querks but the jokes weren't that funny. None of the episodes were funny. Humor is one of the bars that current LLMs haven't passed yet. Sometimes they say things that are unintentionally funny.
The market resolves in a few days. Do you have proof that they faked their dialogue?
@marnet agreed that the dialog was not very impressive. I'd even say most of the character quirks weren't there.
I asked the above question to help me decide if it is worth looking for proof. My bet is (mildly) on no currently.