This market is based on:
/ScottAlexander/in-2028-will-an-ai-be-able-to-gener
If the linked Scott Alexander market resolves NO, this market resolves to 'Nobody'.
If the linked market resolves YES, this market resolves based on which AI was used to trigger the resolution of the linked market.
I reserve the right to edit options in the interest of making this market as predictively useful as possible. For example, to avoid overlap, if 'OpenAI' and 'Sam Altman' were both options I would edit 'Sam Altman' to say 'The first AI dev organization founded by Sam Altman after he leaves OpenAI'. I will generally try to edit the most recently added option in such a scenario, and I will perform the edit as soon as the issue is brought to my attention. If an option is problematic but an appropriate edit is not apparent I will simply mark it as invalid.
Corner case - scramble to generate clause: If multiple AI enable the creation of movies at about the same time, and the resolution of this market comes down to a scramble regarding which AI is merely used first, this market will consider each AI in contention to be the enabler and resolve to each appropriate option evenly. HOWEVER, if an AI is used to make a high quality movie in such a way that people realize it can be done with earlier AIs as well, through the use of a special prompt or something like that, this market resolves only to the AI which was first used to demonstrate success. In other words, this clause allows for split resolution specifically in the case of a race to generate, not in the case of retroactive analysis of capabilities.
1,000@benshindel Pretty silly mistake on my part but not the end of the world. I spent 7k with my mental price off by 10 points, so I only 'lost' an effective couple thousand or so. Thanks for pointing out my mistake before I sunk even more in lol
@jim I mean… I don’t think GPT-5 will be able to make a Hollywood-level film but that’s besides the point because in this case it’s still just directly arb-able with the other market
@benshindel but you saying 55% is insane yes?
(joking, pls don't do that, that's insane)
It's insane because it's so low
@jim well,
1) yes, I do think that's too high, my personal estimate for that market is like 20%, which is why I've put like 1/5th of my net worth on this site on NO
2) but more relevantly, it would be insane because you could get those shares at like 45% or 50%, betting it up to 55% would serve no purpose
I just changed the market so that it resolves to 'Nobody' instead of NA if the linked market resolves NO. Only a tiny amount of mana has been bet since creation so I think that should be fine, but DM me if you have been negatively affected by this change and I will happily send some mana.