The preference for "real" time over "simulated" time, but also for "alive" time over "cryonic" time is completely inconsistent. As soon as anyone is uploaded all that's required is for the hardware to perform one computation, survive until 2150, and then do at least one more computation for this to resolve YES? Meanwhile if someone is revived from cryonic storage, they have to keep living for this to resolve YES? Is there some minimum simulated time to real time ratio or something?

@ForTruth The computations have to be ongoing.

@IsaacKing I have no idea what this means. At least one computation must happen per year? per day? per minute? per second? per millisecond? per nanosecond? per picosecond?

Or do you mean the hardware that runs the computation must have a constant source of power?

@ForTruth I will go by vibes. Does it feel like they're really alive?

Since I don't think one year makes much difference these two markets can be arbitraged.

It's very likely that ASI will happen within our lifetimes. Aging is very likely to be cured a few years before or after ASI, if it doesn't kill us.

@JonathanRay what % do you put at this, considering it's never happened?

@firstuserhere 30%

@JonathanRay cool, thanks (I'd put something in that range too, +- 5%)

The year is 2150. All actively alive people born before 2000 are dead. But there are a lot of stockpiled cryopreserved such people, and it's still uncertain if they can be resurrected. How this market should resolve?

@Lavander It doesn't resolve, since we don't know the correct resolution yet.

@IsaacKing Can you give me any scenario in which this market resolves NO? I don't see any reasonable way. All humans being wiped out doesn't mean that it's impossible to simulate humans.

This makes the title of this market bad/misleading.

@FlorisvanDoorn If all humans experience information-theoretic death, this resolves NO.

I'm born around 2000.

So it can't resolve NO in a timeline when I'm still alive. I'm willing to transfer mana from hypothetical timelines where i'm already dead to timelines where I'm still alive.

It's just as AI apocalypse market for me in this regard, mana is practically worthless in NO-resolution world.

@Lavander Sure, but that won't be the case for other people, so the market probability has a force towards accuracy here, unlike the AI market.

@IsaacKing

Well, (a guess) 60% of people here have incentive to bet it to 100% then.

And the others have just a bit weaker incentive, but they still do, because i think it has strong correlation with their continued lives too.

And loans make it kinda tempting

STEVEN AUSTAD SAID YES, HE'S AN EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGIST, THE EVBIO PEOPLE HAVE BETTER PERSPECTIVE

Steve Austad made a very similar prediction

@firstuserhere I'd love to see this graph extended further backwards.

@firstuserhere The plateu in maximum lifespan is due to life extension beyond 125 years requiring changes to the mechanisms of our biology.

By changing the inputs into our biology and spreading those more equitably we can push the average towards the maximum but never change the maximum.

Some strong opinions from @firstuserhere

@IsaacKing will any manifold user live to know?

See also:

@IsaacKing just don't think it's 60% likely that someone already around 25 years of age will (after all the exposure to the environment of today) will be alive in 2149

@firstuserhere but ofc I'd love to be the one who satisfies this market hahaha

@firstuserhere (i qualify very very barely)

@firstuserhere I think even the R&D towards active learning via attempting to produce ASI by 2050 or earlier would be enough to make me less skeptical on that matter. I don't think exposure to the environment compares much to the idea-space and complexity theory via new theories of computation within the next 20 years, AI aided or not. Curious about a deep dive into your thoughts on this.