Prediction markets usually break down for existential risks - e.g. if everyone gets wiped out by a comet then nobody is there to win the bet (and therefore nobody will take the other side). P(doom) is different: once there is an entity meanfigfully taking the other side of the bet that becomes informative in its own right: manifold.markets/MartinRanda…

Will AI wipe out humanity before the year 2030?

5% chance. Free to play with play money. If humanity is still around on Jan 1, 2030, then this market resolves to NO. If humanity is not around but AI(s) are then this market resolves to YES. If...

manifold.markets

Sep 11, 2026 · 7:03 PM UTC

5
2
13
25,305
PS: the current market is effectively pricing in 0% if account for interest. So we are not there. But unlike other markets on existential risk the price could move meaningfully
1
1,771
Sort replies: Relevant Recent Liked
Replying to @j_foerst
Find whichever entity is voting "yes", track them down to their servers and pull the plug, lol, wth
1
744
Replying to @j_foerst
is it a sponspored post?
548
Replying to @j_foerst
the epistemic status of different markets should also influence how you interpret these results. e.g. I don’t trust that anyone in the world has a meaningful explanation for their p(doom). just too many weird trajectories to marginalize over. In the markets that we deem efficient I trust that people making money actually do have causal sequences of events that, for example, rely on the world staying roughly the same as before.
531
Replying to @j_foerst
you mean given current definition of resolve it reflects some degree of human->AI support (on a biased sample) right? either ~kurzweilites (merge) or ~suttonites (succeed)
1
360
Load more