composing calibrated predictions exploring contingent predictions delivering accurate contingencies calculating critical futures mapping contingent predictions mapping the future generating probable forecasts predicting contingent understanding aggregating probable insights predicting critical futures calculating intelligent predictions delivering definitive wisdom aggregating quantitative predictions mapping intelligent forecasts
Rankings Categories Find Questions

Question

Metaculus Help: Spread the word

If you like Metaculus, tell your friends! Share this question via Facebook, Twitter, or Reddit.

Will there be a complete 4 year interval in which world output doubles, before the first 1 year interval in which world output doubles?

As of 2018, it's taken about 16 years for the world economic output to double. So it might seem absurd to talk about it doubling in one or even four years. But there is a potential major change on the horizon: very advanced Artificial Intelligence.

An important consideration in how to approach the AI alignment problem is the speed of the takeoff from massively subhuman AI to massively superhuman AI. The effectiveness of capacity limitation, as well as the existence of fire alarms for AI safety, are heavily dependent on this, for example.

Paul Christiano suggests operationalising the takeoff speed in terms of economic growth. A slow takeoff is one where the economy doubles in four years before the first time it doubles in one year, and a fast takeoff is one where it does not. (See the same article for Christiano's list of arguments regarding fast vs. slow takeoff.)

Will a 4-year GDP doubling complete (slow takeoff) before a 1-year doubling (fast takeoff) does?

Resolution is by credible assessment of world GDP in constant US dollars (or other appropriately widely-accepted units).

There will be an ambiguous resolution if there is no 4 year (nor 1 year) doubling interval by 2050, to isolate specifically the takeoff speed from other things like the chances of no takeoff occurring at all or human extinction.

Categories: Computer Science – AI and Machine Learning, Computing – Artificial Intelligence, Economy, Series – AI milestones

{{qctrl.predictionString()}}

Metaculus help: Predicting

Predictions are the heart of Metaculus. Predicting is how you contribute to the wisdom of the crowd, and how you earn points and build up your personal Metaculus track record.

The basics of predicting are very simple: move the slider to best match the likelihood of the outcome, and click predict. You can predict as often as you want, and you're encouraged to change your mind when new information becomes available.

The displayed score is split into current points and total points. Current points show how much your prediction is worth now, whereas total points show the combined worth of all of your predictions over the lifetime of the question. The scoring details are available on the FAQ.

Note: this question resolved before its original close time. All of your predictions came after the resolution, so you did not gain (or lose) any points for it.

Note: this question resolved before its original close time. You earned points up until the question resolution, but not afterwards.

This question is not yet open for predictions.

Thanks for predicting!

Your prediction has been recorded anonymously.

Want to track your predictions, earn points, and hone your forecasting skills? Create an account today!

Track your predictions
Continue exploring the site
random question question list

Community Stats

Metaculus help: Community Stats

Use the community stats to get a better sense of the community consensus (or lack thereof) for this question. Sometimes people have wildly different ideas about the likely outcomes, and sometimes people are in close agreement. There are even times when the community seems very certain of uncertainty, like when everyone agrees that event is only 50% likely to happen.

When you make a prediction, check the community stats to see where you land. If your prediction is an outlier, might there be something you're overlooking that others have seen? Or do you have special insight that others are lacking? Either way, it might be a good idea to join the discussion in the comments.