Will Eliezer Yudkowsky publicly claim to have a P(doom) of less than 97% at any point before 2028?

Phrasing here matters, I will count "P(doom)" in text, and also things like "probability of doom", "P doom", "chance we all die" and other similar-enough things in spoken recorded interviews / podcast appearances /etc. as well as in text. I will exercise personal judgement for borderline cases.

P(doom|something else) is not P(doom).

He must explicitly specify a number that is less than 97 or that his number is less than 97 for this market to resolve YES.

Get Ṁ600 play money
Sort by:

So this resolves NO even if he said "My P(doom) is currently less than 97%" because he didnt specify any concrete number?

@SavioMak that would be fine, I'll edit the description to make it clearer for you

@Tripping What if he doesn’t give a number, but uses a probabilistic phrase such as, “I now I think it’s unlikely that we all die?”

predicts NO

@JimHays then it shouldn't count IMO, this would bring too much subjectivity into the market, someone will probably ask his p(doom) quantitatively if EY ever said that we are unlikely to die together.

@JimHays That wouldn't be enough, but it's close to enough. If he said "less than 50%" or "better than a coinflip we don't all die" for example, those would be enough.

More related questions