By March 2025, will Zvi think that working for the EU's AI Office is a good option for Europeans to reduce existential risks from AI?
Question comes from Max (https://twitter.com/MaxHotz/status/1758122969732141489) who is considering such a position.
Resolves YES if I think this is a good option. Does not have to be best option, merely a good option.
Resolves NO if I think this is a bad option. Does not have to be actively harmful, merely not a good use of time.
I do not usually do this, but: Resolves to a percentage (which may or may not be market price) if I do not feel I have enough information to say nor does it seem worth the time to investigate. If I do this, I will not trade the market at any point.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ118 | |
| 2 | Ṁ62 | |
| 3 | Ṁ40 | |
| 4 | Ṁ31 | |
| 5 | Ṁ20 |
I'm going to resolve this YES. I do think this is a good option - not the BEST option, but definitely a good option. There's still work left to do.
What does good idea mean? If more effective than most normal jobs at reducing AI xrisk but less effective than many other xrisk specific roles that the person could have worked for instead, then which way are you thinking of resolving?