Not simply if new claims are made, but if new evidence emerges and is confirmed by the same standards used in Yudkowsky’s bet. In contrast to my bet, Yudkowsky didn’t want the criteria to include new events that emerged after the bet was made. In my bet, non-prosaic origins of any past evidence or evidence that emerges during the 3 year interval is fair game.
Sure. If you could document liquid assets of an amount where paying off the bet would not appear to present any financial issue, I would go as low as 100 to 1.
Not that I have any current betting plans (we already talked previously), but what odds would you allow for someone willing to put their money in escrow? Just asking out of curiosity.
You win the bet if new unexplained claims are made?
What counts as new evidence?
Not simply if new claims are made, but if new evidence emerges and is confirmed by the same standards used in Yudkowsky’s bet. In contrast to my bet, Yudkowsky didn’t want the criteria to include new events that emerged after the bet was made. In my bet, non-prosaic origins of any past evidence or evidence that emerges during the 3 year interval is fair game.
Have you considered offering more generous odds for those with a higher ‘credibility of payback’?
Sure. If you could document liquid assets of an amount where paying off the bet would not appear to present any financial issue, I would go as low as 100 to 1.
Not that I have any current betting plans (we already talked previously), but what odds would you allow for someone willing to put their money in escrow? Just asking out of curiosity.
Not that it matters, but I don’t believe that we did. I’m a different user.
75:1