My version: allocate the first 1000 light-years now, and let each later shell of resources, (1000n, 1000(n+1)] light-years out, be assigned by some future competition or civic process. They themselves float something a bit similar, distributing 10% of resources now, 10% in a century, 10% in a millennium, and so on.
My first thought when reading this is that this process would get broken easily by people cloning themselves. (Or otherwise reproducing very fast and aligning their progeny to themselves, possibly secretly)
Xu Bo and others are already doing this openly, with resources and tools currently available. Maybe future changes require secrecy, but at the moment, it is transparent.
I agree, this is a real potential mode of failure. I do think there are ways to patch this loophole though. For example clones of a given entity could be considered part of the same entity rather than distinct entities. Attempts to forcibly align non-clone progeny with oneself would raise significant human rights concerns, and could reasonably considered to be a violation of the Universal Rights discussed in the AI 2040 Epilogue (that idea of Universal Rights is a part of the Epilogue that I do strongly agree with, even though I do disagree with other parts, as discussed in my post).
P.S. Quick more general note: the purpose of this post isn’t as much to defend those specific two proposals (which, as discussed earlier, are just a couple ideas I thought of off the top of my head). It’s more about arguing “no, a permanent underclass is not okay, and it is a solvable problem.”
My first thought when reading this is that this process would get broken easily by people cloning themselves. (Or otherwise reproducing very fast and aligning their progeny to themselves, possibly secretly)
Xu Bo and others are already doing this openly, with resources and tools currently available. Maybe future changes require secrecy, but at the moment, it is transparent.
I agree, this is a real potential mode of failure. I do think there are ways to patch this loophole though. For example clones of a given entity could be considered part of the same entity rather than distinct entities. Attempts to forcibly align non-clone progeny with oneself would raise significant human rights concerns, and could reasonably considered to be a violation of the Universal Rights discussed in the AI 2040 Epilogue (that idea of Universal Rights is a part of the Epilogue that I do strongly agree with, even though I do disagree with other parts, as discussed in my post).
P.S. Quick more general note: the purpose of this post isn’t as much to defend those specific two proposals (which, as discussed earlier, are just a couple ideas I thought of off the top of my head). It’s more about arguing “no, a permanent underclass is not okay, and it is a solvable problem.”