@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.)
@Jgalt Can you explain how this is "virtually inevitable"? My understanding is that there has been essentially no progress in extending maximum human lifespan during the whole course of human history.
Does anyone want to re-launch this question with a smaller range?
@Uncle Jeff "The academia-loaded Metaculus community is severely biased toward Democrats"
This is a testable hypothesis. I look forward to testing whether this is actually true... eventually.
I'm confused here at the low probability. I predicted it would be higher. Though in hindsight I probably should have conditioned on no existential risk. Another thing I would guess is that people may be overestimating the likelihood of a false positive ie. a therapy is developed which extends lifespan but isn't a rejuvenation therapy. As I have pointed out in another comment here, I am skeptical that even a full cure to both cancer and heart disease would trigger this question to resolve non-ambiguously.
@randallburns "There is a high profile Matthew Barnett that is different i suspect from the one in the question."
Is this a joke?
I'm Matthew Barnett, the one who wrote the question. We could just say "Metaculite Matthew Barnett" if needed.
I'm also not sure we need a bio for Robin Hanson. But I'll let other people give their thoughts about these matters.
@A_Guy I'll believe it when I see the lifespan gains. I'm not sure how much to trust aging reversal as measured by an epigenetic clock.
Here is a source that compiled a lot of statistics to compare James Holzhauer's performance with Ken Jennings.
@TeeJayKay I think in that case it should resolve ambiguously.
@stupidme I think Guam should count, and already does under the current wording. In WW2, Japan attacked Hawaii, which brought us into the war. Yet, at the time, Hawaii was not a state.
@DavidWayne It resolves in 2010 USD, so it doesn’t matter how much the USD inflates or deflates.
A new submission from the T5 Team at Google scores 88.9, improving on the previous best of 84.6.
— edited by Matthew_Barnett
Given that DeepMind's recent weak AGI was based on deep learning, I don't see any reason to think that this question will resolve negatively. Progress in deep learning could suddenly halt, and another paradigm could take over in its place, but that seems increasingly unlikely.