A popular AI priest for a popular religion before 2024 end? (500M subsidy)
30
108
1.1K
Dec 31
25%
chance

These are the most followed religions on wikipedia today.

If there is a popular AI priest or chatbot trained to mimic a religion's diety or spokesperson for the religion (sorry, not aware of a better word), then this resolves YES.

Inspired by https://restofworld.org/2023/chatgpt-religious-chatbots-india-gitagpt-krishna/ (taken from Zvi's newsletter)

If 1% or more of the religions followers as mentioned in the wikipedia table above, follow or interact with the diety or the priest/spokesperson of the religion regularly, then that is popular.

Get Ṁ200 play money
Sort by:

I'm not satisfied with the clarity of the resolution criteria - but I'll leave this here for y'all
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=AI+Church+Sermon+Deutscher+Evangelischer+Kirchentag&t=fpas&ia=web

"The AI church service was one of hundreds of events at the convention of Protestants in the Bavarian towns of Nuremberg and the neighboring Fuerth, and it drew such immense interest that people formed a long queue outside the 19th-century, neo-Gothic building an hour before it began." - AP

Anthony Lewandowski started one of these religions.

I would be surprised if it's doesn't already exist. Not gonna bet on this market tho, because if something exists it doesn't mean that it's actively used by religious people. While this market seems to imply some unknown minimal level impact/importance of such AI. Therefore, the resolution of this market will be highly subjective.

"I'm betting N/A"

predicts NO

@MayMeta It doesn’t seem to subjective to me, it explicitly says 1% of the followers of that religion in the description. So we would just need to figure out the monthly active users or other metric of a particular priest-bot

@DylanSlagh what if there's a software with option to choose religion. Maybe not so easy to get DAU in that case, but we'll see when we get there, for now, it's a broad question to be traded on in "spirit of the market", and later, on precision

@DylanSlagh Whoops sorry missed the 1% line