This month now has a name, probably thanks to AI cyberoffense now being widely available.
Black October (information security) - Wikipedia
> In information security, October 2026 has been referred to as Black October due to several major security incidents and vulnerability disclosures.

I don't think this would or should cause a Yes resolution, but a time article claims that Trump's abduction of Maduro was based on a conversation with Grok. Ctrl+F Grok for it. Not tank battles of factions of US military though.

https://time.com/article/2026/10/01/donald-trump-2026-interview/

This should be way higher

@jim order up

@jim Why? Always curious to hear the thoughts of the nigh all-mighty (at least in confidence) Jim, who feels the exponential deeper in his bones than I ;P

@jim Why? Why, do you think this should be way higher?

@jim but @EliezerYudkowsky implied it shouldn’t. Or did he? Who knows.

@MachiNi here's some proprietary jimfund analysis (please don't share it anywhere) which should help you to understand my views.

Also, here's the distribution of arrival of ASI not conditioned on the fact that we haven't observed ASI yet

@jim are these images of Bayesianism?

@MachiNi i dont know what that is but yes probably

@jim updating my priors

Either this market is not being very Bayesian, or people think I'm going to misresolve it, or it was always hella weighted towards the last couple of months of 2026.

Yeah, weird for the market price not to drift down as the end of 2026 approaches. I think people feel uncertain whether you think Hugging Face and Navier-Stokes and such already count as all hell breaking loose.

And to be explicit, I hear you as saying no, you do not count events so far as qualifying. Possible rule of thumb: if a non-technical, news-ignoring person can, with a straight face, dismiss AI as hype, then all hell hasn't broken loose. They might be being willfully blind, but if they can still do that, it's still potential as opposed to kinetic hell, as another commenter put it. I'm aiming for something similar in my "life-changing for muggles" market.

PS: Claude kindly points out that (putting it my own words) in theory the market price could rationally stay flat-ish if the surprisingness of new evidence like superhuman math keeps managing to roughly cancel the evidence from the clock running out on 2026.

@dreev also if people thought the timing was going to be late in the year

@JussiVilleHeiskanen Right, Eliezer mentioned that one. My own feeling is that there's way too much uncertainty for that to have been reasonable.

Look, exponential growth is not intuitive. The expectation of new evidence feels strong on either side.

@EliezerYudkowsky or you’re being very obscure as usual

@MachiNi * and he's being obscure as usual ;P

(though in this case not actually as obscure as usual; this is very mild compared to a recent long tweet regarding the history of the communication of certain AI/singularity related ideas lol)

Nervous about this one re: wave of open models around the end of the year. 40% for same question but "end of 2027"

Would "you from 10-15 years ago" be surprised at how low your anxiety levels are at this point? Considering the current level of capabilities.

@0xseraphim Does he have low or perhaps instead high anxiety levels for this current level of capabilities, considering this is all easily within his error bars from years ago (when he already had high doom)?

"...all hell could break loose almost instantaneously."

https://youtube.com/shorts/nrlqJ-SzBVg?si=sMM9VaCwAQ_Hwcuy

@EliezerYudkowsky Does this market wait specifically until close to resolve, or can it resolve at any point in time? (Does a lack of a resolution imply that AI hell did not break loose yet?)

@Quroe Lack of a resolution means that I'm not certain that AI hell has already broken out.