The probability of a 26 year old dying of suicide in any given month (within the month of being named the key witness in the OpenAI copyright case, right before deposition) is roughly 1 in 100,000. Of course, the LessWrong community will shrug it off as a mere coincidence because computing the implications is just beyond the comfort level of everyone on this forum. The probability of any ex-OpenAI researcher dying in the past year is roughly 1 in 100 (as far as I know, this has not happened.)
Read the 100 page complaint. He came up with OpenAI as a non-profit for the benefit of humanity. Altman and Brockman stole the idea, name and founding principles from him, and rushed to announce an identical effort before Google Research backed his OpenAI. The point: The idea for OpenAI and the founding principles to operate as a non-profit for the benefit of humanity came through theft. It wasn't Altman or Brockman's idea to begin with. So it is not surprising that they betrayed the mission. The idea was powerful because it was a way to recruit people and get Musk's involvement. And now they live with the consequences of taking another person's vision and attempting to pivot to be a for-profit company that has erased its founding commitments. By the way, he was there before Brockman and Altman who stole it from him, not the other way around, and was sued by OpenAI, not the other way around, so it is bizarre that you claim he is trolling.
Found a link to the 100-page lawsuit of Guy Ravine vs Sam Altman and Greg Brockman here: https://guyravine.com/
They also filed a narrower complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.416410/gov.uscourts.cand.416410.103.0.pdf
No one has picked up the true origin of OpenAI yet. If you dig in to it, you will see some revealing declarations and emails. The whole idea for a non-profit open AI organization and the commitment to share the benefits with humanity by the name of Open AI came through theft.
(1) Bloomberg tells part of the story: https://archive.ph/1wEOX
(2) The 100-page lawsuit of Guy Ravine vs Sam Altman and Greg Brockman tells more of the story (link from here): https://guyravine.com/
(3) They also filed a narrower complaint: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.416410/gov.uscourts.cand.416410.103.0.pdf
Ted and I agreed on a 40:1 bet where I take RatsWrongAboutUAP's side. The term will expire on Aug 2 2028. The resolution criteria is as laid out in the main post of this thread by the user RatsWrongAboutUAP. Unless either of the parties wishes to disclose it, the total amount agreed upon will remain in confidence between the parties.
I responded to you via DM
Carl and I have ultimately agreed to a 29:1 bet on the combined amount. The term will expire on July 25 2028 and may be extended by no more than 2 days upon reasonable request at Carl's sole discretion. The resolution criteria is as laid out in the main post of this thread by the user RatsWrongAboutUAP. Unless either of the parties wishes to disclose it, the total amount agreed upon will remain in confidence between the parties.
Eliezer, I'm offering you double the odds at 75:1, and would put up to $50k against your corresponding amount. If the UFO phenomenon is real, p(doom) may be much lower than you think, and in this view you'd probably be happy to pay it out.
To clarify, I would send the $5k now.
I could offer $5k against your $185k, Carl. If you're interested, DM me. Same odds as a European Roulette, albeit with a much delayed payment.
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/yLFyoYhbhDYtuQWjm/probability-of-death-by-suicide-by-a-26-year-old