Clarifications:
the halt does not need to be permanent
the halt must target a broad swath of frontier AI research
the halt must apply to all countries
the person has to say call for it seriously, i.e. not as a joke.
the person doesn't need to have a super specific plan in mind as long as it's clear what they mean.
examples that might suffice for a halt: training runs above a threshold, banning improvements beyond a given model
1,000People are also trading
I think additional resolution criteria is needed. Does the question resolve if Trump agrees that "pacing the frontier" is necessary (but does not go as far to say all AI research needs to be stopped)? What about if he does so only in specific realms (ie Biology)? I am interpreting the resolution criteria as only triggering if Trump publicly calls for a general, international pause on frontier AI research, but clarification would be welcome.
@Gen The only way I see this happening is if he interprets AI progress as being a threat to him personally. Right now he sees it the other way around.
@Gen so true, donald trump is famously consistent in the things he says and will not contradict or reverse himself for a period of 15 months, during which ai capabilities will grow enormously
@SaviorofPlant like it's one thing if this market is asking about an actual policy action but this can resolve YES with one truth social post
@SaviorofPlant I don’t know. A huge mistake people have done for the last ten years is not take what the guy says literally enough. Many of his policy positions are surprisingly consistent over time (and some, e.g. on trade, date back to much earlier than 2015).
@MachiNi this is pretty different considering how new the whole topic is. unclear if trump had even heard of the concept of a pause prior to last week
a good example would be covid-19. there was a brief period where the federal government advocated for restrictions and he acknowledged the virus was a pandemic that he took seriously around March 17, even though it was sandwiched in between a period of constantly downplaying the virus prior to March and a period of advocating for lifting all restrictions for the rest of 2020. can you really be overwhelmingly confident he wouldn't do something similar after a March 15 2020 level warning shot?
i wouldn't buy this at >50% obviously! but i think YES at 20% is +EV and am mostly holding off on buying a ton of YES at that price for league reasons
@Plant going all in on AI for him is like crypto. He’s just seeing money and that’s consistent. Or avoiding a recession and that’s consistent. And of course beating China. There’s nothing new under the sun.
