| This. Will. Never. Work. This research game is a zero-trust iterated game. Any defection carries the benefit of possibly being permanently valuable. There will always be defections. OpenAI defected WHILE THEY WERE pushing to slow. The cost to the US of deciding to slow is so massively harmful that it is wrong to even put this idea out in the public zeitgeist; it may somehow become a thing that US legislators believe they can accomplish. They CANNOT accomplish this, because the fundamental economics and possible outcomes make it mandatory for any strategic adversary to work as hard as possible to defect. The proposals here imagine a global panopticon surveillance state overseeing all research and chips as a 'reasonable' solution. EVEN IN THAT (terrible) state for the world, we will have effective defection. Like it or not, the world is on this train, and the only sane thing to do is to fully support high quality ethical research groups and firms as they get up the learning curve of this technology. Variants of this idea in AI 2030 included burning some of the US lead to get some nebulous safety metrics improved - also insane. Any slowing allows strategic adversaries time to catch up with very different alignment goals. Do I like this situation? No. Are the people signing these things just fully in denial about the game theory and the stakes and the behaviors of strategic adversaries? Yes, yes they are. |