Aliens.gov was registered on March 17, 2026. What's it about?
Inspired by pluc on Hacker News.
Ground Rules
Update: after May 1 resolution, all answers are now assumed to resolve “No” if the stated criteria are not met, including if the domain never has content or registration lapses. At each close date, existing answers will be resolved based on this new rule. The first new close date will be the end of 2026. If you wish to opt out, tag your answer with [{resolution}-{date}]. For under specified dates, the assumption will be the end of the time period, so “27” would mean end of 2027-12-31. For example, [NO-20260601] (resolves No at 2026-06-02 00:00:00), [NA-27] (resolves N/A at 20208-01-01 00:00:00), [YES-202609] (resolves Yes at 2026-10-01 00:00:00). Time zone will be based on San Francisco (present Manifold HQ) time.
Unless otherwise specified, if the domain redirects to a site with official content (e.g. USPS uses .com even as a government entity), the answers will resolve on the basis of that redirected content. This includes aliens.gov vs alien.gov unless an answer is specifically comparing the domains.
Simple "coming soon" pages don't count as content, unless they can unequivocally resolve one of the answers (e.g. "Coming Soon: The America Gets Rid of All Illegal Mexican Aliens Department (AGRAIMAD)" resolves "It's about mexicans" to YES). A GoDaddy parked page or generic "Coming Soon" does not.
Update 2026-03-21 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): "It's about extraterrestrial life" resolves YES even if ETs are only referenced obliquely (e.g., in the context of a popular explanation for UFOs/UAPs).
Update 2026-03-21 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): For answers related to Mexicans: content about illegal immigrants generally counts as being about Mexicans (since Mexicans are included in that group). However, content specifically about other immigrant groups (e.g. Haitians) without mention of Mexicans would not qualify.
Update 2026-03-22 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): For answers requiring a redirect: whether the answer resolves YES/NO will be judged based on whether the redirected page contains the relevant content (e.g. text).
Update 2026-04-03 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The ground rules paragraph about N/A resolution should be read as: if an answer requires content to exist as a prerequisite to resolution and there is no content on the site by the close date, the answer will resolve N/A.
1,000People are also trading
Bruh i spent like five minutes watching the green text slowly show up on screen and then it's just about illegal immigrants ;-; how predictable
@traders answers have been resolved, many to N/A due to lack of content at the end of the original question close date per the original rules. Because I hate to N/A, I’m updating the rules going forward:
Update: after May 1 resolution, all answers are now assumed to resolve “No” if the stated criteria are not met, including if the domain never has content or registration lapses. At each close date, existing answers will be resolved based on this new rule. The first new close date will be the end of 2026. If you wish to opt out, tag your answer with [{resolution}-{date}]. For under specified dates, the assumption will be the end of the time period, so “27” would mean end of 2027-12-31. For example, [NO-20260601] (resolves No at 2026-06-02 00:00:00), [NA-27] (resolves N/A at 20208-01-01 00:00:00), [YES-202609] (resolves Yes at 2026-10-01 00:00:00). Time zone will be based on San Francisco (present Manifold HQ) time.
Let me know if this makes sense and happy trading! Thanks for participating.
Does the error page count as a site? I don't think this is generated by my browser, the site itself responded, both sites respond the same way.
@AlanTennant I say yes, as "text" vs "content." Even with SSL errors and the like. The HTTP versions also respond with "301 Moved Permanently / nginx".
@Cvill I think the implicit context here would be that it’s not a draft, not tagged in Articles for Deletion etc. You could make one, but it would need to accepted by the Wikipedia community
It's more about Mexicans than about all immigration again, maybe space aliens are visiting Mexico.
@Quroe Case for YES: alien.gov was also registered. this market references only aliens.gov. aliens.gov could redirect to alien.gov
@AlanTennant Wait, huh? Can you explain what you mean a little more?
If aliens.gov redirects to alien.gov then that counts. If it redirects in the other direction, then that does not matter.
@Quroe I mean for the purpose of this market aliens.gov and alien.gov may as well count as the same domain.
@AlanTennant They are technically 2 distinct domains, correct? Is there anything about alien.gov (with no "s") in the description?
@Quroe I know they are technically different, but 🤷♂️, similar enough under the circumstances, and if they were made at the same time, and certainly made by the same people given that nobody believes that the govement could be just selling domains.
@AlanTennant I'm not arguing that they aren't similar -- I totally agree with you there. But they are technically different!
Unless otherwise specified in the answer or comments, if an answer requires content to exist as a prerequisite to resolution (e.g. "It's about extraterrestrial life" could not be true unless there is content on the domain), the answer will resolve N/A at the original question closed date of May 1.
I am guessing your intent was for this paragraph to have an "if there is no content on the site" clause somewhere. As written, you're just saying that all options about the content or behavior of the site resolve N/A period.
@TobiasDraisma April fools is over now, so unless someone has seen something, this can probably resolve NO.
Apparently it's more likely to be about mexicans than be about immigration? 🤷♂️
edit : That's better :) people moved the market so they're the right way round now.