Based on this tweet https://twitter.com/ArthurB/status/1528991584309624832 Question resolves positive if a model is capable of generating arbitrary videos of reasonable quality from text prompts and demonstrates "object permanency" in the sense that it can resolve full object oclusions correctly(for example a mountain being temporarily hidden by a low cloud should still be there after the cloud moves) most of the time. If it's unclear whether some existing model has the capabilities by the deadline I'll use my judgment to decide how to resolve the market, and will lean towards yes in cases where the model mostly does it correctly for simple videos but fails at cherrypicked edge cases.

For extra clarification published means that at least a paper or some oficial announcement has to come out about it before that date. 

Also the fact I haven't resolved yes doesn't necesarily mean that I think none of the stuff that is out yet counts, I'm likely going to wait until June in any case and resolve based on the best model avaliable by then, unless something pretty clearly counts before then (in case someone was updating on how harsh my judgment is based on seeing that I haven't resolved despite whatever model coming out). 

Also note that the criterion isn't based on the original tweet and I might resolve yes based on my own intepretation of what counts as dall-e equivalent and "object permanence" despite Eliezer and Arthur considering Eliezer was right about the original spirit of that question .

By reasonable quality and non crappy I mean something like "dall-e" level quality not "gets hands and details perfectly right and theres no weird artifacts" levels of quality.

Stuff like gen2 might qualify but will have to play arround with it or whatever better model replaces it by the deadline to decide.

I'm going to wait untill I have acess to gen2 to decide whether it fits the object permanece criterion(imo it fits the non-crappy requirement)