rguerreschi

In­tro­duc­ing the Coal­i­tion for a Baruch Plan for AI: A Call for a Rad­i­cal Treaty-Mak­ing pro­cess for the Global Gover­nance of AI

• rguerreschi 16 Oct 2024 23:24 UTC

  10 points

  10

  in reply to: Max Tegmark’s comment on: The Hopium Wars: the AGI En­tente Delusion

  The only winning move is “agreement”, not “not to play”. There is quite some difference.

  But how to find an agreeement when so many parties are involved? Treaty-making has been failing miserably for nuclear and climate. So we need a much better treaty-making, perhaps that fo the open intergovernmental constituent assembly?

• rguerreschi 1 Jun 2024 7:48 UTC

  1 point

  0

  in reply to: Orpheus16’s comment on: We might be drop­ping the ball on Au­tonomous Repli­ca­tion and Adap­ta­tion.

  We need national security people across the world to be speaking publicly about this, otherwise the general discussion on threaats and risks of AI remains gravely incomplete and bias

• rguerreschi 17 Apr 2024 11:06 UTC

  4 points

  −2

  in reply to: Orpheus16’s comment on: Paul Chris­ti­ano named as US AI Safety In­sti­tute Head of AI Safety

  Good insights! He has rhe right knowledge and dedication. Let’s hope he can grow into an Oppenheimer of AI, and that they’ll let him contribute on AI policy more than they let Oppenheimer on nuclear (see how his work on the 1946 Acheson–Lilienthal Report for international control of AI was then driven to nothing as it was taken up into the Baruch Plan)