I will resolve this based on some combination of how much it gets talked about in elections, how much money goes to interest groups on both topics, and how much of the "political conversation" seems to be about either.

Politics

Scott Alexander's 5 year predictions

US Politics

Medicine 

Abortion

🤖 AI

YouTube

Entertainment

Hardware

Rabbit R1

IE "make me a 120 minute Star Trek / Star Wars crossover". It should be more or less comparable to a big-budget studio film, although it doesn't have to pass a full Turing Test as long as it's pretty good. The AI doesn't have to be available to the public, as long as it's confirmed to exist.

Technology

AI Media Creation

Resolves YES if GPT-5 is publicly released before Jan 1, 2025; resolves NO otherwise.

Update from March 18: If the next OpenAI flagship model deviates from the GPT-N naming scheme 

 that is going to be released from OpenAI (e.g. they completely changed the trajectory of their naming scheme) then I will count it as "GPT-5" regardless.

However, if the next flagship model is not called GPT-5 but still conforms to the OpenAI GPT-N naming scheme (e.g. GPT-4.5) 

there will eventually be a model called GPT-5

 that will be released (i.e. they are going to continue with the same naming scheme) then I will not count it as "GPT-5".

🖥️ Technology

🤖 OpenAI

GPT-5 Speculation

ChatGPT

Bitcoin Price Outlook 2024, Experts Predict BTC To Reach $75000 This Year, Also Bullish On MGLS

Bitcoin Price Outlook 2024, Experts Predict BTC To Reach $75000 This Year, Also Bullish On MGLS ... As we approach 2024 experts.

The cryptocurrency has pulled back from its all-time high above $69,000 on February 21, but it still finished the month 37% higher.

🪙 Crypto

 💼  Business

Bitcoin

🌍 World

In "Moving the Eiffel Tower to ROME", a paper claimed to have identified where the fact "The Eiffel Tower is in France" had been stored within GPT-J-6B, in the sense that you could poke the GPT there and make it believe the Eiffel Tower was in Rome.

"The Eiffel Tower is in France" seems (in my personal judgment) like the sort of fact that early AI pioneers could and did represent within GOFAI systems. GPT-J probably does more with that fact - it can for example answer how to get to the Eiffel Tower from Berlin, believing that the Eiffel Tower is in Rome.  But the paper didn't offer neural transparency into how GPT-J gives directions, we don't know the stored patterns for answering that part - just a neural representation of the brute idea that GOFAI pioneers might've represented with in(Eiffel-Tower, Rome).

This market reflects the probability that, in the personal judgment of Eliezer Yudkowsky, anyone will have uncovered any sort of data, pattern, cognitive representation, within a text transformer / large language model (LLM), whose semantic pattern and nature 

 familiar to AI and cognitive science in 2006 (to pick an arbitrary threshold for "before the rise of deep learning").

Also in 2006, somebody might've represented "the Eiffel Tower is in France" by assigning spatial coordinates to the Eiffel Tower and a regional boundary to France.  Idioms like that appear in eg video games long predating 2006.  Nobody has yet identified emergent environmental-spatial-coordinate representations inside a text transformer model, so far as I know; but even if someone did so before the end of 2026 - as mighty a triumph as that would be - it would not (in the personal judgment of Eliezer Yudkowsky) be an instance of somebody finding a cognitive pattern represented inside a text transformer, which pattern was unknown to cognitive science in 2006.

2006 similarly knew about linear regression, k-nearest-neighbor, principle components analysis, etcetera, even though these patterns were considered "statistical learning" rather than "Good-Old-Fashioned AI".  Identifying an emergent kNN algorithm inside an LLM would again 

constitute "understanding via transparency, within an LLM, some pattern and representation of cognition not known in 2006 or earlier".  Likewise for TD-learning and other biologically inspired algorithms, including those considered the domain of neuroscience (from 2006 or earlier).

GOFAI and kNN and similar technologies did not suffice to, say, invent new funny jokes, or carry on a realistic conversation, or do any sort of intellectual labor.  The 

of this proposition, if relevant, is to assert that by end of 2026 we will not be able to grasp any inkling of the cognition inside of LLMs by which they do much 

than AIs could do in 2006; we will not have decoded any cognitive representations inside of LLMs supporting any

 cognitive capabilities original to the era of deep learning

.  We will only be able to hunt down internal cognition of the sort that lets LLMs do more trivial and old-AI-ish cognitive steps, like localizing the Eiffel Tower to France (or Rome); on their way to completing larger and more impressive tasks, incorporating other cognitive steps; whose representations inside the LLM, even if we have some idea of which weights are involved, have not yet been decoded in a way semantically meaningful to a human.

Technical AI Timelines

AI Alignment 

Mechanistic interpretability 

This question resolves to YES if during at least one of the main (non-VP) 2024 general presidential election debates in the United States, the moderator asks at least two separate questions directly related to artificial intelligence, such as the potential for job losses due to AI automation, or existential risk from AI. This question also resolves to YES if AI is otherwise brought up by a candidate in the context of a question unrelated to AI and ALL candidates talk about AI at least once during the same debate, with at least one of the candidates saying "AI", "artificial intelligence", "robots" or a close synonym at least three separate times, at least five seconds apart, during the same debate. Otherwise, this question resolves to NO.

Asking "at least two separate questions" means that the moderator must pose two semantically distinct and individual queries, each intended to elicit a unique response, specifically about artificial intelligence. In other words, simply repeating the same question doesn't count as two separate questions, even if the question is asked twice, first to one candidate, and then a second time to the other candidate. Moreover, asking two distinct questions without waiting for the answer to the first one counts as two separate questions for the purpose of this question. For example, a clear positive instance would be asking first, "How do you plan to manage the existential risks from AI?" and then later asking, "What are your proposals to mitigate job loss due to automation from AI?" These are two separate questions because they cover different facets of artificial intelligence—existential risk and employment. A clear negative example would be if the moderator simply asked, "How do you plan to manage the existential risks from AI?" to one candidate, and then later said "Same question to you" to the other candidate. Even though the question is asked twice, it's not considered two "separate" questions because it's a repetition of the same query.

When it comes to questions related to automation and job losses, the key factor that determines whether the question is "directly related to artificial intelligence" is whether the moderator mentions AI technologies or AI companies, such as ChatGPT, OpenAI, generative AI, or neural networks; any question will automatically qualify if the moderator says the word "AI" or "artificial intelligence" in the question. General questions about automation or job losses that don't clearly link back to AI won't be considered "directly related to artificial intelligence". For example, the following questions would NOT count as being directly related to artificial intelligence:

If there are no 2024 general presidential election debates, this question resolves to N/A.

🗳️ Politics

presidential debate

'harri':4 'potter':5 'severus':1 'snape':2

'cersei':1 'game':4 'lannist':2 'throne':6

'code':4 'geass':5 'lamperoug':2 'lelouch':1

Harry-James-Potter-Evans-Verres (from HPMOR)

'evan':5 'harri':2 'harry-james-potter-evans-verr':1 'hpmor':8 'jame':3 'potter':4 'verr':6

'anti':4 'anti-centrist':3 'centrist':5 'jreg':1 'satir':2

'solution':3 'techno':2 'techno-solution':1

'nuclear':4 'start':3 'war':5 'willing':1

You can help us in resolving options by spending at least 1 mana on each person/character/concept you have an opinion on. Buy YES if you think it's a right-wing thing, and NO if you think it's a left-wing thing.

You can submit any person/character/concept (shortened to p/c/c for the rest of the description), as well as a link / short phrase to give traders some context. If other people trade on your submission, you'll get mana off of their transaction fees.

I may N/A options for quality control, or edit them to provide a more neutral summary.

As a trader, you should buy any amount of YES in p/c/c you think are Right-Wing, buy any amount of NO in p/c/c you think are Left-Wing. I will leave the definition of those terms up to you. The amount of shares doesn't matter for the resolution, one share of yes is one vote and one hundred shares of yes is also one vote.

If I think you are voting purely as a troll, such as buying no in every option, I may block you or disregard your votes. Please vote in good faith! But hey, I can't read your mind. Ultimately this market is on the honor system. 

Note that market prices will be a bit strange here, because this is simultaneously a market and a poll. If you sell your shares, you are also removing your vote. I have unranked the market so it will not impact leagues. 

The market will close every Sunday at Noon EST. I will then check the positions tab on options that have been submitted. 

If there is a clear majority of YES holders, the option resolves YES. If there is a clear majority of NO holders, the option resolves NO. If it's very close and votes are still coming in, the option will remain un-resolved. The market will then re-open for new submissions, with a new close date the next week. This continues as long as I think the market is worth running. It does not matter what % the market is at, and bots holding a position are also counted. In a tie, the tweet will not resolve that week.

I may update these exact criteria to better match the spirit of the question if anyone has any good suggestions, so please leave a comment if you do.

🎨 Culture

🍿 Entertainment and Pop Culture

✖️ X (Twitter)

New York Mets beat Milwaukee Brewers - Mar 29

'29':8 'beat':4 'brewer':6 'mar':7 'met':3 'milwauke':5 'new':1 'york':2

Baltimore Orioles beat Los Angeles Angels - Mar 28

'28':8 'angel':5,6 'baltimor':1 'beat':3 'los':4 'mar':7 'oriol':2

Philadelphia Phillies beat Atlanta Braves - Mar 29

'29':7 'atlanta':4 'beat':3 'brave':5 'mar':6 'philadelphia':1 'philli':2

Chicago White Sox beat Detroit Tigers - Mar 28

'28':8 'beat':4 'chicago':1 'detroit':5 'mar':7 'sox':3 'tiger':6 'white':2

Cincinnati Reds beat Washington Nationals - Mar 28

'28':7 'beat':3 'cincinnati':1 'mar':6 'nation':5 'red':2 'washington':4

Houston Astros beat New York Yankees - Mar 28

'28':8 'astro':2 'beat':3 'houston':1 'mar':7 'new':4 'yanke':6 'york':5

Kansas City Royals beat Minnesota Twins - Mar 28

'28':8 'beat':4 'citi':2 'kansa':1 'mar':7 'minnesota':5 'royal':3 'twin':6

Los Angeles Dodgers beat St. Louis Cardinals - Mar 28

'28':9 'angel':2 'beat':4 'cardin':7 'dodger':3 'los':1 'loui':6 'mar':8 'st':5

Miami Marlins beat Pittsburgh Pirates - Mar 28

'28':7 'beat':3 'mar':6 'marlin':2 'miami':1 'pirat':5 'pittsburgh':4

San Diego Padres beat San Francisco Giants - Mar 28

'28':9 'beat':4 'diego':2 'francisco':6 'giant':7 'mar':8 'padr':3 'san':1,5

Tampa Bay Rays beat Toronto Blue Jays - Mar 28

'28':9 'bay':2 'beat':4 'blue':6 'jay':7 'mar':8 'ray':3 'tampa':1 'toronto':5

'28':7 'beat':3 'chicago':4 'cub':5 'mar':6 'ranger':2 'texa':1

Oakland Athletics beat Cleveland Guardians - Mar 28

'28':7 'athlet':2 'beat':3 'cleveland':4 'guardian':5 'mar':6 'oakland':1

Arizona Diamondbacks beat Colorado Rockies - Mar 28

'28':7 'arizona':1 'beat':3 'colorado':4 'diamondback':2 'mar':6 'rocki':5

Seattle Mariners beat Boston Red Sox - Mar 28

'28':8 'beat':3 'boston':4 'mar':7 'marin':2 'red':5 'seattl':1 'sox':6

Tampa Bay Rays beat Toronto Blue Jays - Mar 29

'29':9 'bay':2 'beat':4 'blue':6 'jay':7 'mar':8 'ray':3 'tampa':1 'toronto':5

Miami Marlins beat Pittsburgh Pirates - Mar 29

'29':7 'beat':3 'mar':6 'marlin':2 'miami':1 'pirat':5 'pittsburgh':4

Houston Astros beat New York Yankees - Mar 29

'29':8 'astro':2 'beat':3 'houston':1 'mar':7 'new':4 'yanke':6 'york':5

Arizona Diamondbacks beat Colorado Rockies - Mar 29

'29':7 'arizona':1 'beat':3 'colorado':4 'diamondback':2 'mar':6 'rocki':5

Oakland Athletics beat Cleveland Guardians - Mar 29

'29':7 'athlet':2 'beat':3 'cleveland':4 'guardian':5 'mar':6 'oakland':1

San Diego Padres beat San Francisco Giants - Mar 29

'29':9 'beat':4 'diego':2 'francisco':6 'giant':7 'mar':8 'padr':3 'san':1,5

Seattle Mariners beat Boston Red Sox - Mar 29

'29':8 'beat':3 'boston':4 'mar':7 'marin':2 'red':5 'seattl':1 'sox':6

Los Angeles Dodgers beat St. Louis Cardinals - Mar 29

'29':9 'angel':2 'beat':4 'cardin':7 'dodger':3 'los':1 'loui':6 'mar':8 'st':5

New York Mets beat Milwaukee Brewers - Mar 30

'30':8 'beat':4 'brewer':6 'mar':7 'met':3 'milwauke':5 'new':1 'york':2

Chicago White Sox beat Detroit Tigers - Mar 30

'30':8 'beat':4 'chicago':1 'detroit':5 'mar':7 'sox':3 'tiger':6 'white':2

Baltimore Orioles beat Los Angeles Angels - Mar 30

'30':8 'angel':5,6 'baltimor':1 'beat':3 'los':4 'mar':7 'oriol':2

Philadelphia Phillies beat Atlanta Braves - Mar 30

'30':7 'atlanta':4 'beat':3 'brave':5 'mar':6 'philadelphia':1 'philli':2

Oakland Athletics beat Cleveland Guardians - Mar 30

'30':7 'athlet':2 'beat':3 'cleveland':4 'guardian':5 'mar':6 'oakland':1

Cincinnati Reds beat Washington Nationals - Mar 30

'30':7 'beat':3 'cincinnati':1 'mar':6 'nation':5 'red':2 'washington':4

Kansas City Royals beat Minnesota Twins - Mar 30

'30':8 'beat':4 'citi':2 'kansa':1 'mar':7 'minnesota':5 'royal':3 'twin':6

Miami Marlins beat Pittsburgh Pirates - Mar 30

'30':7 'beat':3 'mar':6 'marlin':2 'miami':1 'pirat':5 'pittsburgh':4

Tampa Bay Rays beat Toronto Blue Jays - Mar 30

'30':9 'bay':2 'beat':4 'blue':6 'jay':7 'mar':8 'ray':3 'tampa':1 'toronto':5

'30':7 'beat':3 'chicago':4 'cub':5 'mar':6 'ranger':2 'texa':1

Houston Astros beat New York Yankees - Mar 30

'30':8 'astro':2 'beat':3 'houston':1 'mar':7 'new':4 'yanke':6 'york':5

San Diego Padres beat San Francisco Giants - Mar 30

'30':9 'beat':4 'diego':2 'francisco':6 'giant':7 'mar':8 'padr':3 'san':1,5

Arizona Diamondbacks beatColorado Rockies - Mar 30

'30':6 'arizona':1 'beatcolorado':3 'diamondback':2 'mar':5 'rocki':4

Los Angeles Dodgers beat St. Louis Cardinals - Mar 30

'30':9 'angel':2 'beat':4 'cardin':7 'dodger':3 'los':1 'loui':6 'mar':8 'st':5

Seattle Mariners beat Boston Red Sox - Mar 30

'30':8 'beat':3 'boston':4 'mar':7 'marin':2 'red':5 'seattl':1 'sox':6

Baltimore Orioles beat Los Angeles Angels - Mar 31

'31':8 'angel':5,6 'baltimor':1 'beat':3 'los':4 'mar':7 'oriol':2

Philadelphia Phillies beat Atlanta Braves - Mar 31

'31':7 'atlanta':4 'beat':3 'brave':5 'mar':6 'philadelphia':1 'philli':2

Cincinnati Reds beat Washington Nationals - Mar 31

'31':7 'beat':3 'cincinnati':1 'mar':6 'nation':5 'red':2 'washington':4

Miami Marlins beat Pittsburgh Pirates - Mar 31

'31':7 'beat':3 'mar':6 'marlin':2 'miami':1 'pirat':5 'pittsburgh':4

New York Mets beat Milwaukee Brewers - Mar 31

'31':8 'beat':4 'brewer':6 'mar':7 'met':3 'milwauke':5 'new':1 'york':2

Tampa Bay Rays beat Toronto Blue Jays - Mar 31

'31':9 'bay':2 'beat':4 'blue':6 'jay':7 'mar':8 'ray':3 'tampa':1 'toronto':5

Chicago White Sox beat Detroit Tigers - Mar 31

'31':8 'beat':4 'chicago':1 'detroit':5 'mar':7 'sox':3 'tiger':6 'white':2

Houston Astros beat  New York Yankees - Mar 31

'31':8 'astro':2 'beat':3 'houston':1 'mar':7 'new':4 'yanke':6 'york':5

Kansas City Royals beat Minnesota Twins - Mar 31

'31':8 'beat':4 'citi':2 'kansa':1 'mar':7 'minnesota':5 'royal':3 'twin':6

'31':7 'beat':3 'chicago':4 'cub':5 'mar':6 'ranger':2 'texa':1

Oakland Athletics beat Cleveland Guardians - Mar 31

'31':7 'athlet':2 'beat':3 'cleveland':4 'guardian':5 'mar':6 'oakland':1

Arizona Diamondbacks beat Colorado Rockies - Mar 31

'31':7 'arizona':1 'beat':3 'colorado':4 'diamondback':2 'mar':6 'rocki':5

San Diego Padres beat San Francisco Giants - Mar 31

'31':9 'beat':4 'diego':2 'francisco':6 'giant':7 'mar':8 'padr':3 'san':1,5

Seattle Mariners beat Boston Red Sox - Mar 31

'31':8 'beat':3 'boston':4 'mar':7 'marin':2 'red':5 'seattl':1 'sox':6

Los Angeles Dodgers beat St. Louis Cardinals - Mar 31

'31':9 'angel':2 'beat':4 'cardin':7 'dodger':3 'los':1 'loui':6 'mar':8 'st':5

Chicago White Sox beat Atlanta Braves - Apr 1

'1':8 'apr':7 'atlanta':5 'beat':4 'brave':6 'chicago':1 'sox':3 'white':2

Chicago Cubs beat Colorado Rockies - Apr 1

'1':7 'apr':6 'beat':3 'chicago':1 'colorado':4 'cub':2 'rocki':5

Washington Nationals beat Pittsburgh Pirates - Apr 1

'1':7 'apr':6 'beat':3 'nation':2 'pirat':5 'pittsburgh':4 'washington':1

Baltimore Orioles beat Kansas City Royals - Apr 1

'1':8 'apr':7 'baltimor':1 'beat':3 'citi':5 'kansa':4 'oriol':2 'royal':6

Miami Marlins beat Los Angeles Angels - Apr 1

'1':8 'angel':5,6 'apr':7 'beat':3 'los':4 'marlin':2 'miami':1

Philadelphia Phillies beat Cincinnati Reds - Apr 1

'1':7 'apr':6 'beat':3 'cincinnati':4 'philadelphia':1 'philli':2 'red':5

Tampa Bay Rays beat Texas Rangers - Apr 1

'1':8 'apr':7 'bay':2 'beat':4 'ranger':6 'ray':3 'tampa':1 'texa':5

New York Mets beat Detroit Tigers - Apr 1

'1':8 'apr':7 'beat':4 'detroit':5 'met':3 'new':1 'tiger':6 'york':2

Houston Astros beat Toronto Blue Jays - Apr 1

'1':8 'apr':7 'astro':2 'beat':3 'blue':5 'houston':1 'jay':6 'toronto':4

Arizona Diamondbacks beat New York Yankees - Apr 1

'1':8 'apr':7 'arizona':1 'beat':3 'diamondback':2 'new':4 'yanke':6 'york':5

Oakland Athletics beat Boston Red Sox - Apr 1

'1':8 'apr':7 'athlet':2 'beat':3 'boston':4 'oakland':1 'red':5 'sox':6

San Diego Padres beat St. Louis Cardinals - Apr 1

'1':9 'apr':8 'beat':4 'cardin':7 'diego':2 'loui':6 'padr':3 'san':1 'st':5

Seattle Mariners beat Cleveland Guardians - Apr 1

'1':7 'apr':6 'beat':3 'cleveland':4 'guardian':5 'marin':2 'seattl':1