You prompted me to look more closely at the terms of the bet [1], and they are indeed absurdly biased: just one in ten on three of the five scenarios counts as

You prompted me to look more closely at the terms of the bet [1], and they are indeed absurdly biased: just one in ten on three of the five scenarios counts as success. On the substitution of a robot, which simplifies the task, Alexander says "we" agreed to it, and I assume the "we" includes Vitor, as, in his comment (in which he does not concede defeat), he seems to accept the substitution (he also acknowledges that he probably should not have accepted these terms.) The other issue is who judges the outcome. The terms specify Gwern or Cassander (without having secured the assent of either) or they will "figure something out." In his victory claim, Alexander does not mention any independent judge, and interestingly, Gwern posted two comments without explicitly concurring with Alexander's claim, though his second comment might be read as tacitly accepting it. My initial comment, therefore, needs some modification: replace the "given that" with "if", and I think it stands as a counterfactual conditional, having a probably-false antecedent. I don't think Alexander is doing his reputation any favors by being so triumphalist about this misbegotten bet. [1] https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/a-guide-to-asking-robots-to-design/comment/6945486 https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/a-guide-to-asking-robo...