What is terrfifying is that even if Mr. Topaz had wanted to be secure, the state of the AI safety community , sorry the drone economy safety community, means he will probably be pushed into creating a demo.
Consider Mr Beryl’s plight. All the drone economy safety communities are working on one of 2 things.
1) solid fuel rocket drones (they can go very quickly but are not very steerable), played today by Ms Onyx
2) Frictionless massless drone safety researchers played today by Mr Amber.
Mr Beryl has the idea that maybe they could use rotors instead of solid fuel rockets, but rotors tend to disintegrate. He thinks he has a good idea for a rotor that might not disintegrate.
Beryl to Onyx: “Hey anyone working on rotor based-drones, I have an idea for rotors that might not disintegrate”?
Onyx: “Solid fuel rocketry might be able to form an economy.”
Beryl: “Sure, okay. It might. Rotors drones have very different flight characteristics compared to solid fuel rockets, so I’m not sure I can re-use your work. But anyone working on rotor drones?”
Onyx: Silence
Beryl to Amber: “Maybe it would be worth considering drones to have mass and friction. It changes things a lot when you do?”
Amber: “We haven’t solved the problem of drones going faster than light and forming black holes without considering mass and friction. Once we do that we’ll consider mass and friction.”
Beryl: “Okay let me know when you do. In the meantime know anyone working on rotor drone safety?”
Amber: Silence
The only way for Beryl to get people to talk about and think about a rotor drone economy safety seems to be to create a demo of a rotor not falling apart when attached to a motor. He might have ideas about how to make a rotor drone and a economy and talk about it, but most of his effort needs to be convincing people that this is a realistic option. Which seems like a demo is needed. And Beryl has to follow the same path as Topaz.
What is terrfifying is that even if Mr. Topaz had wanted to be secure, the state of the AI safety community , sorry the drone economy safety community, means he will probably be pushed into creating a demo.
Consider Mr Beryl’s plight. All the drone economy safety communities are working on one of 2 things.
1) solid fuel rocket drones (they can go very quickly but are not very steerable), played today by Ms Onyx
2) Frictionless massless drone safety researchers played today by Mr Amber.
Mr Beryl has the idea that maybe they could use rotors instead of solid fuel rockets, but rotors tend to disintegrate. He thinks he has a good idea for a rotor that might not disintegrate.
Beryl to Onyx: “Hey anyone working on rotor based-drones, I have an idea for rotors that might not disintegrate”?
Onyx: “Solid fuel rocketry might be able to form an economy.”
Beryl: “Sure, okay. It might. Rotors drones have very different flight characteristics compared to solid fuel rockets, so I’m not sure I can re-use your work. But anyone working on rotor drones?”
Onyx: Silence
Beryl to Amber: “Maybe it would be worth considering drones to have mass and friction. It changes things a lot when you do?”
Amber: “We haven’t solved the problem of drones going faster than light and forming black holes without considering mass and friction. Once we do that we’ll consider mass and friction.”
Beryl: “Okay let me know when you do. In the meantime know anyone working on rotor drone safety?”
Amber: Silence
The only way for Beryl to get people to talk about and think about a rotor drone economy safety seems to be to create a demo of a rotor not falling apart when attached to a motor. He might have ideas about how to make a rotor drone and a economy and talk about it, but most of his effort needs to be convincing people that this is a realistic option. Which seems like a demo is needed. And Beryl has to follow the same path as Topaz.