/AI2h ago

Analyst Warns of Bostromian Vulnerabilities in AI Power Dynamics

--0--
Comments
Original post
bayes@bayeslord#1291inAI

Power, violence, security, liberty

I regret to inform you that our universe might be vulnerable in the Bostromian sense. It’s possible that the current world has degrees of freedom that we can’t coordinate on controlling quickly enough while also having a continuation of the norms of the governance and liberty that are sufficient for the truth of our world, other than a panopticon. Note that in such worlds power accumulation is a slippery slope. A lot of these worlds probably end up sucking for most people. It would be nice if it weren't true, but it might be true.

bayes@bayeslord

An AI lab coordinated pause or slowdown of AI production seems more likely than it was in 2023. Lots of tradeoffs here but I think the arguable value of a pause is slightly greater today than it was in 2023. The argument that it will be squandered is harder to make when we have automated research, which we don’t quite have yet (we have automated engineering). For what it’s worth I’m not personally in favor of a pause at this time, mostly because it breaks too many other parts of the tight rope walk through the singularity, the tech tree might have dragons, and adversaries are real.

11:48 AM · Jun 4, 2026 · 212 Views
Sentiment
Sentiment building, check back later.
Cluster Engagement
-
Views
-
Comments
-
Reposts
-
Bookmarks
Expand data
Posts from X
Most Activity
Most ActivityTimeline
VIEWS451
bayes@bayeslord

The military, the police and the primary mechanisms of government law enforcement will be automated and smarter than humans. Make of this what you will.

bayes@bayeslord

Mutually assured destruction is based on 20th and early 21st century technology. We are going to undergo rapid technology change, maybe a millennium’s worth, in a short period of time. This means MAD is not a given. This is solvable and not a perfectly certain or clean disruption because error rate tolerance for decisive advantage is very low and potentially infeasible. Some people have brought this topic up in the past quite an unserious way, and I think that was wrong, and irresponsible. This is one of the most serious topics we can discuss. People are rightly nervous about it but I think it's time.

2hViews 451Likes 10Bookmarks 0
BOOKMARKS3LIKES11REPLIES1
bayes@bayeslord

Finally: the AI labs could end up nationalized in the strong sense. The American system doesn’t really seem compatible with this, to me, but there are many paths to nationalization that don’t seem off-limits in either a conservative or liberal political environment. It seems that in principle the labs can maintain coordination with the military and intelligence services on the backend without making an even bigger show of it than has already been made. The federal government having unilateral power of the kind we’re talking about is also extremely risky. Private companies having this power is different because they won’t generally speaking directly enact violence, and aren't legally allowed to. I'm not a huge fan of nationalization but this world is confusing and apparently becoming more treacherous.

bayes@bayeslord

The military, the police and the primary mechanisms of government law enforcement will be automated and smarter than humans. Make of this what you will.

2hViews 401Likes 11Bookmarks 3