How are you envisioning the prevention of strategic takeovers? It seems plausible that robustly preventing strategic takeovers would also require substantial strategizing/actualizing.
We can at least say that, if the totality of the mental elements surrounding the wildfire is going to notice and suppress the wildfire, it would have to think at least strategically enough to notice and close off all the sneaky ways by which the wildfire might wax. This implies that the surrounding mental elements do a lot of thinking and have a lot of understanding relevant to strategic takeovers, which itself seemingly makes more available the knowledge needed for strategic takeovers.
My mainline approach is to have controlled strategicness, ideally corrigible (in the sense of: the mind thinks that [the way it determines the future] is probably partially defective in an unknown way).
Shallow comment:
How are you envisioning the prevention of strategic takeovers? It seems plausible that robustly preventing strategic takeovers would also require substantial strategizing/actualizing.
Are you echoing this point from the post?
It might be possible for us humans to prevent strategicness, though this seems difficult because even detecting strategicness is maybe very difficult. E.g. because thinking about X also sneakily thinks about Y: https://tsvibt.blogspot.com/2023/03/the-fraught-voyage-of-aligned-novelty.html#inexplicitness
My mainline approach is to have controlled strategicness, ideally corrigible (in the sense of: the mind thinks that [the way it determines the future] is probably partially defective in an unknown way).