Never gonna eat you up

Never gonna spit you down

Never gonna chew around and digest you

Never gonna cook some Thai

Never gonna bake a pie

Never gonna boil or fry and freeze you

Wait so if it resolves yes when the video gets taken down, how would it ever resolve no?

You know the rules and so do I

This is big if true.

He's never gonna give you up. He's never gonna let you down.

The man said it, I believe it.

https://manifold.markets/JonathanRay/will-youtubecom-still-exist-in-2300

https://manifold.markets/JonathanRay/conditional-on-youtubecom-existing

That’s 63% YouTube not existing + 11% Rick astley giving you up in worlds where YouTube continues existing

@JonathanRay Pumping my bags with facts and logic

@JonathanRay is that really how probabilities work?

@Simon1551 P(rick give you up) = P(YouTube doesn’t exist) + P(YouTube exists AND rick give you up) = .63 + .37*.35

The decomposition markets below show that this should be 85%

@JonathanRay Now 76%. This market is still grossly underpriced

@JonathanRay I'll be honest my no buy here is not for the purpose of earning mana 🎶🎶

@JonathanRay There is one way to solve this

Not only does he promise, IN SONG, that he will NEVER give ANY of us up, he has NEVER even shown the slightest intention of doing so. The premise of the question doesn't even make much sense, considering he CAN'T POSSIBLY give us up. We are but a memory to him, and in order for him to give us up, he would have to forget us. BUT, at the same time, he would have to CONSCIOUSLY go back on his promise, which CONTRADICTS the first premise of forgetting about us, as you cannot willfully forget something.

To summarize, not only is he showing no indication of giving us up, and not only is it super unlikely to be the case, but he's BOUND by LAWS of CAUSALITY into NOT giving us up.
In addition, the death of any party, whether that be him, or us, does NOT break the rules of his oath, because he's not GIVING us UP, rather we are separated by the forces of the universe. And as a final supplement, the death of Youtube or the internet itself will NOT mean that he's giving us up; Not only does he not have agency in the matter, but his oath is kept on DVD format, on the pieces of paper where his lyric was written, or even imprinted on our very memory.

@SaladDongs Could this be used in a legal case if abandonment happens in the vicinity of Rick Ashley?

@SubreeKeller I believe Rick Astley would be charged with perjury if he violates his promise, if that's what you're asking. Yet another argument for why he would be inclined not to do so

@SaladDongs "Never Gonna Give You Up," was Released on a warm summery day on 27 July 1987, and while undoubtedly his most famous song, another song was released a mere five months later in in the much more wintery and cold 12 January 1988 date. In this less famous although also highly recognizable tune, "Together Forever," Astley explicitly states, "Together forever and never to part, Together forever we two." That's right - "We two." Not, "We anyone."

Not only did Rick Astley give ALL of us up in favor of a single partner, he did so over 35 years ago, and only the most delusional think that he never gave them up. Let's look a little bit closer at the aforementioned 1988 single, "Together Forever by Rick Astley," wherein he mentions:

• I would move Heaven and Earth To be together forever with you

• It's destiny calling A power I just can't deny

• It's never-changing, Can't you hear me, I'm saying I want you for the rest of my life

• There ain't no mistaking It's true love we're making

Wow, just wow...given that he's talking about WE TWO, which does not include any one of us here on Manifold do these sound like the words of a man who, "never gave you up?"

In short, would you trust someone who said that they would never and I quote "never gonna give you up," only to blatantly and very publicly, five months later, turn around and say to someone else, "There ain't no mistaking...It's true love we're making...together forever we two."

If that were to happen in any normal circumstance any impartial observer would clearly say that this individual did in fact gonna give you up.

@SaladDongs Also, exhibit B: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_b5V1wchZJU

The man explicitly states in this song that he is, "Giving Up on Love."

The dude explicitly said he's giving up, giving up, giving up, giving up on love because he's been hurt before, giving up on love cause he don't want chu no more...not sure how much more clear it can get than that.

Related:

@JonathanRay

This market should be 1-(youtube_exists*(1-P(Give_up)|youtube_exists)) = 1-(0.27*0.55) = 0.8515

This is too long a timeline for me to bet on. I think it's rather unlikely that Youtube will exist and continue to serve content in 280 years, so I would bet YES.

On a short timeline of a year, I don't think Rick would give me up.

Youtube has a pretty strong financial incentive in keeping it up because of all the rickroll links on the internet. Rick has a pretty strong financial incentive in keeping it up because that's what he's famous for and it brings a lot of traffic to his youtube channel.

OTOH the base rate for link rot is pretty high, and the base rate for tech companies going out of business is pretty high, and the base rate for artists putting their music videos behind a paywall is pretty high.

What if all humans die from some cause, and all computers eventually crash, including youtube servers?

@Ibozz91 this market will go down with it