Cornell Law Professor gives a talk Nov 10 on how AI will impact copyright.

The median prediction for whether this gets independently confirmed is sitting at 25%: https://www.metaculus.com/questions/18090/room-temp-supercon...

I'm also highly scheptical but if you'd asked a bunch of random people wether or not the relativity theory is true or nuclear weapons when they were first demonstrated they probably would have been equally sceptical

What does that prove though? It's not wrong to doubt extraordinary hypotheses just because they are sometimes correct. Consider all the times those kinds of hypotheses are confirmed to be wrong.

Right, in which case asking a broad audience will be, at best, noise.

Someone also previously linked this betting market here which currently has it at only 16%. https://polymarket.com/event/is-the-room-temp-superconductor...

... whether it gets confirmed by _the first_ independent attempt.

Predicted by random people on the internet as well.

So technically the question asked is only if "the first independent replication attempt" will confirm (current guess 10%) and I think thats about right I can imagine there is a lot of 'build Twitter in a weekend' going on and it will take a while before the dust settles and there is a solid replication to base a solid conclusion.

Now down to 19%. Starting to stabilize, at 143 forecasters.

The 'nays' getting lots of traction on twitter right now

https://twitter.com/alexkaplan0/status/1684642852616192000

Some schmo with an instant coffee company. There's no need to surface random people's opinions.

But it's tech instant coffee

1000 to 1? Dollars to bitcoins? Shares in their room temperature superconductor monopoly?

I mean, he has a PhD in physics, at least. He's not just some rando off the street.

I was a high energy theorist and I even went to the same school as this guy (Princeton). I’ll admit I’m a complete rando when it comes to superconducting materials. PhD in an unrelated subfield means very little. I guess it helps with grokking academic drama.

For context, he is the same guy that went viral yesterday[0] excited with optimism, now saying there are other more possible explanations for the results besides superconductivity

[0]: https://twitter.com/alexkaplan0/status/1684044616528453633

Just to keep us all up to date, he’s now linked a figure from the recently discovered third paper and returned to breathless excitement.

Alright, I’ll give you 10:1 odds.

Looks like I need to give some sucker 3:1 odds to take his money. Anyone want to bet it’s real?

Yeah, Metaculus trains, identifies, and hires "Metaculus Pro Forecasters" for particular projects: https://www.metaculus.com/help/faq/#what-are-pros

Forecasting in tournaments — head-to-head on the same set of questions — is the true test of forecasting ability.

The Metaculus prediction weights predictors by how accurate they've been.

Yes, but if voters are voting the majority (and probable) decision, that just continues the trend of predicting obvious outcomes.

It’s not something to do with understanding domain knowledge and voting based on scientific research.

I wouldn't say AGI in 10 years is predicting an obvious outcome. And the same goes for many other questions on the site.

It will trend towards the major opinion as it gets closer to 10yrs. They haven’t been around long enough.