Is this "unspecified PasteBin" leak of Q* that went viral on Twitter real?
17
1kṀ2681resolved Jan 1
Resolved
NO1H
6H
1D
1W
1M
ALL
Resolves when Q* is revealed by OpenAI and we have knowledge of what it is. If the leak was substantially correct, resolves YES. Otherwise, resolves NO.
At minimum, a YES resolution would involve Q* actually existing, and an energy based model (EBM) being a key part Q*. I won't bet.
This question is managed and resolved by Manifold.
Get 
1,000 to start trading!
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ52 | |
| 2 | Ṁ34 | |
| 3 | Ṁ19 | |
| 4 | Ṁ3 | |
| 5 | Ṁ1 |
Sort by:
Consensus seems to be evolving to no, eg: https://x.com/jeremyphoward/status/1770635047722438733?s=20
@DanMan314 I don't doubt that the consensus might be evolving to no, but what in the linked tweet do you take to be evidence of the consensus evolving to no?