For this sort of ambiguous market, we would normally leave it to the creator's discretion to resolve.

However in this case that isn't an option, as Levi is banned for a long history of taking advantage of ambiguous criteria. Thus our only option is to N/A it, otherwise, we will all just endlessly argue over the criteria and the videos.

The fact it was a silly and misleading market was not the reason it should be N/A'd. We unsubsidized and unranked it to reflect its lack of real predictiveness.

@SirSalty I feel they should only be left to creators when the creators themselves do not have conflict of interest/also invest in the market

⚠Banned Creator

📢Resolved to N/A (Ambiguous criteria taken advantage of by creator who has a history of doing so)
📝Discord Thread https://discord.com/channels/915138780216823849/1197536911590428683

@SirCryptomind "You came to a strange place. You don't have acces to text channels or they don't exist"

@KongoLandwalker https://discord.com/invite/eHQBNBqXuh

@SirCryptomind Finally.

@SirCryptomind Nooo give me my profits

Why was this resolved this point

For the record, Levi commented two months ago saying that bikes didn't count, and that it had to be some type of board. Bike-related videos or articles aren't evidence for yes.

For discussion see my comment below. This market is a YES.

@NicoSzerman No it's not. AI never wiped out humans in 2023.

@Snarflak looks like someone doesn't know how to read just yet

@Pykess Yes, and the bet was resolved incorrectly. It should be resolved to "NO".

Why tf was this re resolved by the user surely after a MOD changes the resolution a BANNED account cant just go back and change it again.

Glad this dude is banned

This should resolve to NO. No evidence has been presented that meets the decision logic.

Discuss here: https://discord.com/channels/915138780216823849/1197536911590428683

Hello. I think this question was misresolved to a NO, and it should have been a YES. In fact, it was a YES and a mod updated it to NO. I respect the decision, but I really think it is a misresolution. https://manifold.markets/levifinkelstein/will-ai-wipe-out-humans-before-end

I think that 1. the evidence presented satisfies the criteria, and 2. even in spirit, there are many videos online satisfying a YES. That is why, in fact, I voted YES.

For "in spirit" resolution, there are many videos of "AI wiping out humans". See this video for example of a self-driving car killing a biker https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RASBcc4yOOo. The evidence presented was an extreme example just to show how easily the resolution is a YES, and how everyone who voted NO did not think it thoroughly.

@NicoSzerman A bike is not a skateboard, surfboard or snowboard.

@NicoSzerman That person wasn't on their bike, though

@Awaclus You can still "wipe out" while bicycling, but that requires you to be on the bike first, and to then fall off.

@Snarflak Sure, but as per the description, it has to be a skateboard, surfboard or snowboard for it to count for this market.

@Awaclus I think the ",etc." at the end of the list covers other forms of transport.

But it still doesn't count as YES. Being hit by a car while carrying your surfboard across the road is not a "wipe out".

@NicoSzerman "The "wipe out" must have occurred after market creation (so on or after July 12th, 2023.)" - you got a video proof of such an event?

@NicoSzerman Everyone, that video is evidence in favor of the question "in spirit", as many have argued it should be resolved. So the the question resolves to YES both technically and in spirit.

@NicoSzerman

You're interpretation of the "spirit" of the question has little to do with the actual question as written. The prompt provided three specific scenarios in order to be resolved "Yes" and nobody has provided evidence that any of them were met.

@CaseyC How is the board video not evidence ...

@NicoSzerman Because it doesn't involve AI causing humans to wipe out?

@Snarflak Video satisfies the clearly stated conditions in the description. The description specifically explains what wipe out means here.

@NicoSzerman No it doesn't, as everyone has explained numerous times. Jumping off a skateboard intentionally is not a "wipe out". No mid-1990s Totally Rad sports announcer would go "oooh, wipeout!" after watching someone intentionally jump off a skateboard.