Yeah. Though I’d go further. The US government and leading AI companies have already jointly decided to race hard and win. It’s one bloc (“Anthropic has much more in common with the Department of War than we have differences”—Dario Amodei). This bloc sees itself in the lead and has immense money and power in their sights. They ain’t stopping to sign no treaty.
That’s the big problem I see now, it’s not international. It’s a handful of people in the US who are already far ahead of everyone else in the world, and want to be even further ahead. If this handful of people continue on their course, there’ll be no treaty ever, no matter what the rest of the world does.
“The US government and leading AI companies have already jointly decided to race hard and win.”
Have they ever defined what exactly this race is? What does its finishing line, or the post-race state of the world look like? What are they trying to accomplish?
They want to be the only ones with the nuke that prints money. It’s exactly as simple-minded as it seems. You can tell them all day that it’ll backfire; they’ll listen and continue.
This right here is why I’m solidly convinced that there will be no equivalent to SALT for the AI arms race. Nukes cost lots of money to maintain. An AGI would—at the start, for sure—be a massive economic boon.
Okay, but then what? Do they all (US companies + US government) believe that—once they have actually built AGSI—there will be a static endpoint at which all their competitors say: “Okay, you’ve invented AGSI now; we all give up”? If so: In what competition, exactly, would they be giving up? Would the rest of the world then stop conducting further AI research? Or would the OpenAI/Anthropic/Google/Musk AI then be deployed to sabotage AI research in the rest of the world? I don’t understand the scenario.
Yeah. Though I’d go further. The US government and leading AI companies have already jointly decided to race hard and win. It’s one bloc (“Anthropic has much more in common with the Department of War than we have differences”—Dario Amodei). This bloc sees itself in the lead and has immense money and power in their sights. They ain’t stopping to sign no treaty.
That’s the big problem I see now, it’s not international. It’s a handful of people in the US who are already far ahead of everyone else in the world, and want to be even further ahead. If this handful of people continue on their course, there’ll be no treaty ever, no matter what the rest of the world does.
“The US government and leading AI companies have already jointly decided to race hard and win.”
Have they ever defined what exactly this race is? What does its finishing line, or the post-race state of the world look like? What are they trying to accomplish?
They want to be the only ones with the nuke that prints money. It’s exactly as simple-minded as it seems. You can tell them all day that it’ll backfire; they’ll listen and continue.
This right here is why I’m solidly convinced that there will be no equivalent to SALT for the AI arms race. Nukes cost lots of money to maintain. An AGI would—at the start, for sure—be a massive economic boon.
Okay, but then what? Do they all (US companies + US government) believe that—once they have actually built AGSI—there will be a static endpoint at which all their competitors say: “Okay, you’ve invented AGSI now; we all give up”? If so: In what competition, exactly, would they be giving up? Would the rest of the world then stop conducting further AI research? Or would the OpenAI/Anthropic/Google/Musk AI then be deployed to sabotage AI research in the rest of the world? I don’t understand the scenario.
Well, obviously, then they threaten or sanction the rest of the world into not building AI.