Will a more significant protest calling for a pause in AI than the pause letter by May 2029 (or an actual pause)?

Tyler Cowen linked to this clarification of his claims: https://x.com/_ArnaudS_/status/1793209848953233872

It included this: Will we ever see another significant protest calling for a 6 month pause on AI development of frontier models? Highly doubt it.

Resolves YES if there is such a protest, or there is indeed such a pause. If it is a protest, it must call for either an indefinite or 6+ month pause. If it is an actual pause, it must last 6 months or be in place on the resolution date, and must include the most advanced AI labs (either 3+ most advanced, or all those within striking distance of the leader).

Resolves NO if there is no such event.

An open letter signed by people who combine to be more prominent than the original pause letter (since the original wording said 'another') would automatically count as significant.

If this market gets sufficient participation I will consider operationalizing 'significant' more carefully. For now, it is roughly 'is a for-real protest and gets covered as such with substantial visibility by at least 3 mainstream media outlets.'

Get Ṁ600 play money
Sort by:

If they're just saying "ban further frontier AI research" will this count as calling for a six month pause (because it's an indefinite pause)?

@PhilosophyBear It is a pause if and only if it calls for pausing training of frontier models. It does not require a pause in the use or creation of AIs not at the frontier, but of course something larger (e.g. ban all AI) would also count.

Is there a word missing in the title or something or am I just bad at reading? (Note that the latter is entirely possible 😅)

More related questions