Will Eliezer Yudkowsky or his ideas be mentioned during the September 27, 2023 Republican Presidential debate?
resolved Sep 29

A GOP Presidential debate will be held on September 27, 2023.

@EliezerYudkowsky spends a significant portion of his time attempting to publicize his views that artificial intelligence is a threat to humanity's future. This question attempts to determine whether his efforts are becoming effective at bringing the AI safety issue into mainstream policy discussion, or whether his sometimes aggressive rhetoric harms his message.

This market resolves to YES if Yudkowsky or any of his unique ideas appear during the debate while it is LIVE on-air. It resolves N/A if the debate is cancelled or posponed past September 30, 2023, and NO otherwise.

The following are examples of circumstances that resolve to YES:

  • Anyone saying Yudkowsky's name

  • Any mention of an idea that was firstly or is uniquely attributed to Yudkowsky, such as "some fear that a machine that generates paperclips could destroy the world"

  • Any mention of Yudkowsky's books, writings, or appearances, such as "an article was published in TIME magazine threatening nuclear strikes"

  • Candidates or moderators saying words that Yudkowsky initially coined, like "foom"

The following are insufficient to resolve to YES:

  • Questions about AI in general, such as "how will you ensure that humans are not displaced by ChatGPT?"

  • "There were 1000 signatories to a letter" (unless Yudkowsky wrote the letter and garnered support for it)

  • General statements about ideas that were developed before Yudkowsky's time, such as "an AI takeover could occur"

  • Statements that any machine learning researcher would make, such as "deep learning optimizes for loss functions"

If it isn't obvious whether a statement is uniquely attributed to Yudkowsky and there is controversy among bettors, I will feed the transcript of the debate into Claude 2 along with the exact text of this question. I will ask the model to resolve the market, and the model's answer will be canonical.


RESOLUTION: I watched the entire debate, and looked through the transcript, and AI was only mentioned by Chris Christie. Christie's views were the opposite of Yudkowsky's - Christie believed that all government regulations should be removed from AI - so the market resolves to NO.

Get Ṁ600 play money

🏅 Top traders

#NameTotal profit
Sort by:

@EvanDaniel Yep. As far as I can tell there isn't anything here. I'll leave the market open until close, and unless somebody proves otherwise before then, this seems an easy NO.

Note that Christie actually did seem to understand AI pretty clearly, and how it would change existence, which I found very surprising. But he was essentially the exact opposite of Yudkowsky's views - he specifically said he wanted to remove all regulations for AI development.

More related questions