🏅 Top traders

I tried to follow the long comment thread, some of the Instagram links showed a login window but I was able to see the top one.

First, I don't see where the view counter is so I can't tell if it had 10 million views before 2025.

But, I think this fails the description, especially here:

If the video is not silent then the audio must be broadly generated by an AI.

This is the broad statement that prefaces all the other stuff about audio. There is another thing about background music and other qualifiers, but this video seems to be using an audio track that is not generated by AI, so it doesn't count.

I'm going to resolve No.

---

I wish I could just go resolve all of RemNi's markets N/A, every single one is a disaster like this....I reaaaaally wish we could put a warning symbol on them to warn traders....

@Eliza the original creator of the market resolved a similar market on lax criteria. This should be NA

@PoliticalEconomyPK I already addressed that one separately.

@Eliza

I wish I could just go resolve all of RemNi's markets N/A, every single one is a disaster like this....I reaaaaally wish we could put a warning symbol on them to warn traders....

I profit from No resolution, but I'd be totally fine with N/A, because we actually don't really know. We just got "no evidence" and no way to get evidence.

You mods (not necessarily you, Eliza) should at least be able to do an @traders in all of RemNi's markets wirh a copy&paste warning? Something like

Hello @traders, unfortunatelly the market creator is gone. This market will be resolved be mods, if we still have the capacity to do so once this is closed, and if we get notified by someone calling @mods. Resolution criteria might be unclear or ambiguous, so this might resolve N/A. If you care about the actual matter of the facts in this market, you might want to create a new market and provide clear and easy to check resolution criteria there.

I tried to point mod attention towards all of RemNi's AGI/ASI markets (there are dozens!), most of which will be open for years and are heavily traded, because I thought someone would issue a warning along those lines, but didn't get much response except a mod trading and suggesting new resolution criteria in that single market.

I keep arguing that those markets are unclear and/or ambiguous, and thus are mispriced, and thus attract traders, and thus take liquidity and trader bonuses away from potential competitor markets, which provide clear criteria. Plus traders stop trading on the underlying reality and start trading on resolution modalities.

A policy of "resolving N/A when in doubt" would send the message "If you want to profit from correct predictions, invest in a market with proper criteria", as well as "traders might be more incentivized to invest in markets with clear criteria in the future, it might pay off to create markets with clear resolution criteria".

@Primer would be cool if we (traders) could buy these markets and adjust them to updated criteria tbh

@Primer like in an auction or something

@MalachiteEagle I tried to start a moderator discussion on Discord about how to handle these.

Obviously it would be nice if we could slot in someone else to take care of these. Someone else suggested a 'hot take' of giving ownership to an LLM 😁

I wish the platform let me deprioritize these markets and favor, for example, a newly created market that you could make, with the same subject but better criteria and a not-deleted account.

@Primer There's a nonzero chance that there would be a mass N/A on these markets but for now I am trying to resolve in line with how I see the regular mod guidelines. Basically, handling it as if this was a one-off market from a random deleted account. I will try to brainstorm if there is some good discussion topic or poll we can have where you would be able to share your ideas more broadly. It's absolutely possible to get Manifold to change policies on stuff like this, but it usually takes some work.

@Eliza Maybe some day I need to heavily procrastinate and will do some write-up "Why N/A is only the 2nd worst option" 😅

@Primer dunno, I kind of see the markets on manifold as things that are alive in their own way, it's a shame to kill them.

@Primer one way of making the resolution of the YouTube questions simpler would be to add to the description that a link to a video meeting the criteria must be posted before the questions deadline on January 1st, with a screenshot of the view count. Then it's dead simple to resolve

@MalachiteEagle It would indeed be that simple. Additionally, that is exactly how those will be resolved anyways.

@mods resolves NO

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DBocFcaMrMH/?igsh=emU0ZXNsM2lwc2Vo

This one is longer then 45 seconds and did way more then 10 .mil

@PoliticalEconomyPK Doesn't count because he's using this soundtrack: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNSkhTmLO7s

@PoliticalEconomyPK The reason this video is popular is because of the music to a great extent. That audio is not AI-generated.

@PoliticalEconomyPK

```
Background music or sound effects that are not AI-generated are permissible provided that 90% of the video contains AI-generated audio on top (e.g. AI-generated voices), and that the AI-generated audio is the "main subject" of the audio track (cannot be simply AI-generated sound effects on top of a music track created by a human).
```

@MalachiteEagle

Only the video being fully ai is allowed which is the case in the video i tagged

@MalachiteEagle it has a background music that is not ai generated but the entire video is ai

@PoliticalEconomyPK you're misreading the description. The video you tagged does not fulfuill the criteria "90% of the video contains AI-generated audio on top"

@PoliticalEconomyPK the audio track is 100% a music created by a human, so this video doesn't count

@PoliticalEconomyPK you can sell your YES votes now to avoid too much loss, I won't continue betting you down

@PoliticalEconomyPK (but if you delay too long then I will haha)

@MalachiteEagle what you're saying only stands if the subject of the video is the audio itself. Whereas in this case the main thing is the video the audio is only added to create a feel for the video.

@MalachiteEagle youre free to bet as you please. I think we'll need a moderator to decide who is right

@PoliticalEconomyPK no, you're wrong. You're reading the part of the description where it talks about videos that have both AI and human-made audio mixed together. The video you tagged only has human-made audio so it doesn't count

@PoliticalEconomyPK (I'm trying to help you not lose all your mana)

@MalachiteEagle but the video part is completely ai generated so it should count i think. The description is kinda vague though it does mention explicitly "Background music or sound effects that are not AI-generated are permissible"

@PoliticalEconomyPK no, the description is not vague. It's really clear in explicitly excluding the video that you linked.

@PoliticalEconomyPK It's the same as the comments on this question: https://manifold.markets/RemNi/will-an-ai-generated-video-reach-10-9511a17489a9

@PoliticalEconomyPK (I also mistakenly thought I had found such a video)

@PoliticalEconomyPK like the sentence you're referring to "Background music or sound effects that are not AI-generated are permissible"

is immediately follow by: "provided that 90% of the video contains AI-generated audio on top"

you've just intentionally cropped off the second part of that sentence because it explicitly excludes the video you tagged

@MalachiteEagle then what exactly is a permissable not ai generated soundtrack?

@PoliticalEconomyPK the description is saying that you can have an AI-generated music track, and then add things like real sound effects like bells and whistles or whatever. The small effects are permissible provided that the vast majority of the audio track is the AI-generated music.

@MalachiteEagle ok

@PoliticalEconomyPK which makes sense. You wouldn't want to exclude those videos just because they had minor sound effects

@PoliticalEconomyPK I'll buy another 100 no i a minute if you don't sell

@PoliticalEconomyPK Ok, bought another 100 NO. Will buy another 100 in a minute if you don't sell.

(I'm trying to not be cruel because I made the same mistake, but if I don't do it someone else will)

@MalachiteEagle you can buy at once if you want im already looking for a new candidate video

@PoliticalEconomyPK remember that the question was for January 1st 2025 and we're now march 1st 2025. This question is not going to resolve YES

@PoliticalEconomyPK It can only resolve NO or at best N/A

@MalachiteEagle i know that

@PoliticalEconomyPK so why... aren't you selling? 🤣

@PoliticalEconomyPK if im able to find a video uploaded to Instagram before 2025 so it should count

@PoliticalEconomyPK No, because you wouldn't be able to prove that it reached 10M views even if you did find a video which met the criteria

@MalachiteEagle its already mostly gone so cant sell now

@PoliticalEconomyPK I can sell some of mine tbh

@PoliticalEconomyPK I can sell half of my NO as a compromise

@PoliticalEconomyPK (but best do it quick before someone else jumps on this market)

@PoliticalEconomyPK does that work for you?

@MalachiteEagle if you sell all of it then that would be great then ill do to

@PoliticalEconomyPK haha nah. I saw you making the mistake and putting free mana on the table so I took it before someone else did. But you're not adversarial and i'm not greedy so willing to sell half of my 600 NO votes

@PoliticalEconomyPK all of your no's after my yes's

@PoliticalEconomyPK alternatively I can just bet NO to the floor and take everything. Because the Mods are pretty much certain to resolve this question as NO the same as they did for the youtube question

@MalachiteEagle its up to you bro no pressure. Its a game anyway

@PoliticalEconomyPK and as soon as someone else with enough mana reads this thread that's exactly what they're going to do