This is putting aside the extreme toxicity of directly trying to develop decisive strategic advantage level hard power.
The pivotal acts that are likely to work aren’t antisocial. My guess is that the reason nobody’s working on them is lack of buy-in (and lack of capacity).
Also, davidad’s Open Agency Architecture is a very concrete example of what such a non-antisocial pivotal act that respects the preferences of various human representatives would look like (i.e. a pivotalprocess).
Perhaps not realistically feasible in its current form, yes, but davidad’s proposal suggests that there might exist such a process, and we just have to keep searching for it.
Yeah, if this wasn’t clear, I was refering to ‘pivotal acts’ which use hard engineering power sufficient for decisive strategic advantage. Things like ‘brain emulations’ or ‘build a fully human interpretable AI design’ don’t seem particularly anti-social (but may be poor ideas for feasiblity reasons).
The pivotal acts that are likely to work aren’t antisocial. My guess is that the reason nobody’s working on them is lack of buy-in (and lack of capacity).
Also, davidad’s Open Agency Architecture is a very concrete example of what such a non-antisocial pivotal act that respects the preferences of various human representatives would look like (i.e. a pivotal process).
Perhaps not realistically feasible in its current form, yes, but davidad’s proposal suggests that there might exist such a process, and we just have to keep searching for it.
Yeah, if this wasn’t clear, I was refering to ‘pivotal acts’ which use hard engineering power sufficient for decisive strategic advantage. Things like ‘brain emulations’ or ‘build a fully human interpretable AI design’ don’t seem particularly anti-social (but may be poor ideas for feasiblity reasons).