I’m mostly convinced by Plan A (given the techno-economic assumptions).
I still struggle with TRT as plausible without radical internationalisation. Financial incentives are too strong for companies, geoeconomic incentives too strong for states. The social contract would likely be unstable and therefore hard to enforce. AI companies already have strong levers with governments and are likely to use them to obstruct, dodge, cheat or FUD. We don’t have enough time for it to become incontrovertible that cigarette smoke causes cancer.
I would thus tradealgorithmic governance (inspired by Bioengeneering) with some open weight release (for Unis, independent researchers to participate in alignment research for positive long tail spillovers), ie (some) Research Transparency with (some) open weights.
You might be interested in other proposals we make such as filtered transparency (see here). I don’t fully understand your comment but I do think that TRT is a bigger lift than filtered transparency. We recommended it because I think it is the best option, and I think it’s viable if enough people push for it. But TRT is NOT a load bearing part of Plan A; more lax transparency proposals are very much consistent with it.
I was trying to paint a rough sketch of “spillovers in context” most of which is done well in your scenario planning. My disagreement largely with the current rapidly developing “state-AI complex”. The amount of private (and likely soon, public) capital, talent, state interest concentrated make it unlikely that TRT will be acceptable.
I would argue AI2040′s linchpin is compute. Coordinate compute, open up almost everything else. Governments and companies want control of many other things, algorithms, talent, data etc. These will also be negotiable between companies and states. This means companies, states get to keep certain advantages in return for offers . Algorithms alongside compute are likely to be the most significant assets under negotiation & both will be part of asks and offers.
I will definitely have a look at filtered transparency, it may help anticipate some of the mechanics here.
I’m mostly convinced by Plan A (given the techno-economic assumptions).
I still struggle with TRT as plausible without radical internationalisation. Financial incentives are too strong for companies, geoeconomic incentives too strong for states. The social contract would likely be unstable and therefore hard to enforce. AI companies already have strong levers with governments and are likely to use them to obstruct, dodge, cheat or FUD. We don’t have enough time for it to become incontrovertible that cigarette smoke causes cancer.
I would thus trade algorithmic governance (inspired by Bioengeneering) with some open weight release (for Unis, independent researchers to participate in alignment research for positive long tail spillovers), ie (some) Research Transparency with (some) open weights.
You might be interested in other proposals we make such as filtered transparency (see here). I don’t fully understand your comment but I do think that TRT is a bigger lift than filtered transparency. We recommended it because I think it is the best option, and I think it’s viable if enough people push for it. But TRT is NOT a load bearing part of Plan A; more lax transparency proposals are very much consistent with it.
Hi Thomas, sorry this was not very clear,
I was trying to paint a rough sketch of “spillovers in context” most of which is done well in your scenario planning. My disagreement largely with the current rapidly developing “state-AI complex”. The amount of private (and likely soon, public) capital, talent, state interest concentrated make it unlikely that TRT will be acceptable.
I would argue AI2040′s linchpin is compute. Coordinate compute, open up almost everything else. Governments and companies want control of many other things, algorithms, talent, data etc. These will also be negotiable between companies and states. This means companies, states get to keep certain advantages in return for offers . Algorithms alongside compute are likely to be the most significant assets under negotiation & both will be part of asks and offers.
I will definitely have a look at filtered transparency, it may help anticipate some of the mechanics here.