I understand that Metaculites may experience some unease over this question, since it seems very unlikely to resolve positively, even given my generous resolution criterion. However, I think it's an important question in order to keep journalists and public health policy analysts in check. These types of questions demonstrate how informed communities of amateur predictors can often outperform the experts.

— edited by Matthew_Barnett

It's important to note that this question can resolve positive without any progress at all. All that would be required is for many 120+ longevity claims to be verified. It is conceivable that there is some population of humans whose genetics permit maximum lifespans slightly longer than Europeans (which currently make up the majority of verified longest lifespans). Given that by 2100, many more countries will have entered the era where birth certificates are a common thing for all citizens, I do not rule this possibility out.

I formulated this question back when Elon Musk was in 25th place among billionaires. I'm glad that this question looks prescient now. :)

The prediction is called off if some other innovations cause a historically exceptional increase in the rate of scientific progress during this period

I feel like this part of the prediction makes it a pretty useless prediction. This is kind of like saying, "Nothing spectacular will happen within the next few decades, conditional on nothing spectacular happening."

@Jgalt After today, the Republican leadership views him with scorn. So just like late-2015.

This comment was originally posted on Donald Trump

Now that this is "the AGI question" on Metaculus, it's been getting a lot of attention from outside sources. Unfortunately, I currently see some issues with the question, and it seems likely to resolve ambiguously. Therefore, I request the @admins to make the following changes, conditional on their approval. None of these changes are intended to change the original criteria, or the intended purpose of this question; they are simply disambiguations of what was written. Change the first criterion to: "Able to reliably pass a 2-hour, adversarial Turing t...

@Roko You won't look that smart given your public comment. Also, what's worth more, looking slightly smart, or giving accurate information?

@GoldbergMachinations The fine print on this question says, “If the question title or text is present but obscured (such as being incorrectly transcribed), this is sufficient to resolve positively.”

Thus, it does not matter that the “q” was lowercase.

— edited by Matthew_Barnett

There hasn't even been a Nobel Prize for string theory yet, and that theory is much more developed, and is taken far more seriously within the physics community (from what I can gather as a layman). Most Nobel prizes also seem to be awarded for experimental work, rather than theoretical work.

I bet Robin Hanson on Twitter my $9k to his $1k that de novo AGI will arrive before ems. He wrote,

OK, so to summarize a proposal: I'd bet my $1K to your $9K (both increased by S&P500 scale factor) that when US labor participation rate < 10%, em-like automation will contribute more to GDP than AGI-like. And we commit our descendants to the bet.

My bet was rational under the current median prediction for this question (and assuming low levels of risk aversion).

@SimonM I… just… imagine what you could do with $28 million, and now imagine instead being in space for 10 minutes. I often do not understand humans.

Part of what could make Metaculus great is if it were a place that consistently beat common wisdom due to having a few high-quality predictors that knew "better than the crowd" in their particular domain of study. Here's one way I think it could be done: For questions, or question categories (either could work, I'm still thinking about the details) we allow users to enter a confidence score indicating how confident they are about questions of that type, relative to other categories or questions. Everyone's confidence score would by default be equal for...

@HadiKhan I watched the video and I feel like I'm watching a different video than you. Floyd said very explicitly and frequently he was having trouble breathing (both before and after the knee was on his kneck), and he even cited the knee on his neck as a reason (once it was there). My guess is that he had some trouble breathing and the knee made it worse.

The fact he resisted arrest didn't seem to me to make the response justified, as his resistance seemed very passive rather than active.

— edited by Matthew_Barnett

@(Cyrus) [This lifespan.io article](https://www.lifespan.io/news/evolution-wont-stop-aging-any-time-soon-but-medicine-might/) explains, > The study shows that “immortality and everlasting youth are the stuff of myths,” according to The Guardian. The article goes on to say that “an unprecedented study has now confirmed that we probably cannot slow the rate at which we get older because of biological constraints.” Other outlets published similar conclusions, with Futurism saying that the study shows “an ‘invariant rate of aging’ that won’t slow down”. > ...

@Tamay No, the body does say that the concession must not be rescinded.

This question resolves to the date at which the losing candidate concedes that they have lost the 2020 US Presidential Election, as long as they do not explicitly rescind said concession within 24 hours.

A [new announcement from the SENS Research Foundation](https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=4275679612467740&id=138424229526653) states, > In June 2021, we began an investigation into the conduct of our Chief Science Officer, Dr. Aubrey de Grey, initially in response to allegations raised by two members of the scientific community. This investigation – conducted by an independent, third-party investigator – remains ongoing. > However, we recently were made aware of communications by Dr. de Grey indirectly attempting to apply pressure on one of...
@(Tamay) It's as good of time as any to link to [Economists Against the FDA](https://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=279), > I have tried to survey all economists’ writings on the FDA and have not been able to find a single instance of an economist defending the contemporary FDA or advocating tighter restrictions. Contrary to the joke about laying all the economists end to end, those who study the issue do reach a conclusion: Relax restrictions on drugs and devices. > [...] > Milton Friedman: “The FDA has done enormous harm to the heal...
@(PeterHurford) Let me put it another way: suppose a user were to ask whether a solar eclipse will happen on December 14th this year. Suppose further that the *intention* of this question was to test whether a New Age apocalypse theory would come true, which predicts that the moon will fall out of the sky on that date, rather than deliver an eclipse. Personally, I’d predict 99%, and I’d sleep just fine with that prediction. But until December 14th, the apocalypse adherents are going to insist they haven’t been proven wrong yet. And so it makes sense to w...

@ugandamaximum I don't see any evidence that his bets are promotional. I'm also confused why people say that his wagers are trivially small. Most are $100, which is pretty normal for casual bets. (Do you need people to make multi-thousand dollar bets for them to look "serious"? If so, then perhaps Metaculus is not the site for you, since everyone here is betting $0.)