Would it be a good use of time for me to cover "AGI and the EMH"?
Basic
3
Ṁ115
resolved Oct 6
Resolved
NO

The Open Philanthropy Worldview Contest awarded six prizes. Now I need to decide - would it be a good use of time to review and respond to some or all of those winners? Thus, six markets. I will use the trading to help determine whether, and how in depth, to examine, review and respond to the six posts.

If I read the post/article for a substantial amount of time, and in hindsight I judge it to have been a good use of time to have done so whether or not I then respond at length, this resolves to YES.

If I read the post/article for a substantial amount of time, and in hindsight I judge it to have NOT been a good use of time to have done so whether or not I then respond at length, this resolves to NO.

If I read the post long enough to give it a shot and then recoil in horror and wish I could unread what I had read, that also resolves this to NO.

If I choose NOT to read the post for a substantial amount of time, then this resolves to my judgment of the fair market price at time of resolution - by default the market price, but I reserve the right to choose a different price if I believe there has been manipulation, or to resolve N/A if the manipulation situation is impossible to sort out.

If I do trade on this market, that represents a commitment to attempt the review if I have not yet done so, and to resolve to either YES or NO.

Authors of the papers, and also others, are encouraged to comment with their considerations of why I might want to review or not review the posts, or otherwise make various forms of bids to do so (including in $$$ or mana, or in other forms).

These markets are an experimental template. Please do comment with suggestions for improvements to the template.

The post can be found here: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/wp-content/uploads/Chow-Halperin-and-Mazlish-2023-Basil-Halperin.pdf

Get
Ṁ1,000
and
S1.00
Sort by:

Is it possible that a second engagement would have been productive? I suppose it is possible, but I did review my own response and looked briefly at the original, and there is no one arguing for YES, so I am going to do the nice thing and resolve this NO.

I was reminded that I have previously engaged with this post from when it was first put out, and wrote https://thezvi.substack.com/p/on-ai-and-interest-rates.

So this market asks whether, in light of the prize, I should revisit their post and the related issues despite this. We do know that my posting that reply did not stop them from winning the prize, so perhaps there is more to say. Perhaps not.