As described here:
https://youtu.be/3d0kk88IE8c?si=NCqJixJU8vIwR6dU
Resolves yes if we have evidence they did this before 26th November 2023. If no evidence by end 2024 resolves no.
1,000
3.00For the next year, more generally: https://manifold.markets/Fedor/will-an-llm-crack-an-encryption-cip
Readers of Zvi's substack, please don't judge us for having had the market at 8% when he checked. We just wanted to buy at better prices. It's obviously <1%.
I created a roughly analogous market since I didn’t find this one. Possible arbitrage, but it also allows the described MD5 attack: https://manifold.markets/TychonNotos/will-credible-evidence-of-4chans-op?r=VHljaG9uTm90b3M
Will you at least admit the bizarre oddity of this?
The earliest source of the leak, is from this 4chan thread. https://boards.4channel.org/g/thread/97470795#p97475746. 11/23/23, at 00:07.
The earliest mention of the Q* model by the media, is this article by The Information. https://www.theinformation.com/articles/openai-made-an-ai-breakthrough-before-altman-firing-stoking-excitement-and-concern Which is at 3:37 PM, or 15:37, 11/22/23
There is no earlier mention of the Q* model in the internet, before that time.
The time difference between the first official Q* mention, and the leak, is 8 hours 20 minutes.
Meaning, if the leak was fake, and its author read The Information article the moment it was posted, he had to have written and posted that leak in 8 hours 20 minutes.
How is it humanly possible, to create such an unfalsifiable, expertly written leak, within 8 hours? 6 hours, if we are more realistic, since it takes time to find and digest the article, and create an authentic leak image.
@jacksonpolack Are you saying it as a hyperbole? Or unironically?
Are you an AI researcher?
@jacksonpolack If you wrote it, wouldn't have the AI researchers already found many big flaws and mistakes in your fake leak?
There was an earlier pseudo-mention by me. /Mira/will-openai-launch-a-new-product-wi
The title is inaccurate because I wasn't told all the details at the time, but "Will something be announced or leaked today that involves sunshine or the sun or stars?" is such an oddly-specific market to make.
The true story of Q* and the OpenAI AGI must wait for later though... you guys are not yet ready.
How is it humanly possible, to create such an unfalsifiable, expertly written leak, within 8 hours?
If you like bureaucratic/dystopian horror fiction, you'll love the SCP wiki!
@PercyOtebay We have seen plenty of flaws (e.g. the idea that it can analyze its parameters for correctness without having an independent knowledge of the world separate from the model to compare it with.)
@DavidBolin Sounds interesting. Could you expand on this on a separate post? Would love to read that!
@PercyOtebay it still could have been pre-written.
Assume there will eventually be news/rumors/fud about a new OpenAI model
Write a 'leak', make it hard to falsify, somewhat plausible, and take your time
Wait for breaking news. Take the name (Q*), plug it into your 'leak', release
I happen to think this could have been written in 8 hours, but I don't think it's necessary.
@robm They could have made the fake leak more realistic, if they named it q*, instead of qualia. I find that odd.
@PercyOtebay we should start from a prior of an AI system breaking aes 192 to be extremely unlikely, given that gpt-4 can't solve basic substitution ciphers. Its difficult to overstate what a massive jump that is. So things like this just don't really move the needle for me, you need a truly massive amount of evidence to prove something so extraordinary.
the price is down to 24% btw, if you want to buy more yes! massive orders!
