AGI—alignment—paperclip maximizer—pause—defection—incentives

I would like to expose myself to critique.

I hope this is a place where I can receive some feedback + share some of the insights that came to me.

https://​​en.wikipedia.org/​​wiki/​​Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect“people with low ability, expertise, or experience regarding a certain type of task or area of knowledge tend to overestimate their ability or knowledge”

I’m somewhere on the spectrum 🤡

1. AGI alignment metrics

To avoid paperclip maximizer and solving climate change by eliminating humans I suggest the following value: LIFE

I’ve embedded this principle into Network State Genesis and described it in the founding document in the following way:

1. No killing (universally agreed across legal systems and religions)
2. Health (including mental health, longevity, happiness, wellbeing)
3. Biosphere, environment, other living creatures
4. AI safety
5. Mars: backup civilization is fully aligned with the virtue of life preservation

These principles were applicable to the Network State and I think first three of them can be repurposed towards AGI alignment.

(another core belief is GRAVITY—I believe in GRAVITY—GRAVITY brought us together)

2. Pause, defection, incentives

New proof-of-X algorithm to ensure compliance with AI moratorium. Ensuring supercomputers are not used for training more powerful models.

Proof-of-work consumes loads of energy.

It could be a mixture of algorithms, that is more energy friendly:

  • peak power for a short amount of time (solve something complex quickly)

  • proof of storage

A mixture of different algorithms to ensure various elements of the data centre are yielded unsuitable for other means. I know too little about the challenges of operating a data center, I know too little about training AI, ultimately I do not know.

I’m just aware of the incentive to defect and no obvious way to enforce the rules.

  • So much easier to prove the existence of aliens.

  • So much more difficult to disprove.

  • So much easier to prove you did the thing.

  • So much more difficult to disprove.