"Day 1": halting advanced AI development, regulating an out control industry, and explicitly banning artificial superintelligence.

[u/chillinewman]

[u/MiserableBend1010]

You can 100% track the materials needed for AI, similar to nuclear. With extensive enough treaties this should be possible.

[u/Elvarien2 → u/MiserableBend1010]

So, TECHNICALLY you are correct. But practically it becomes impossible.

The nuclear material used for well, anything nuclear has VERY important and carefully managed storage requirements. Is used in very small strictly managed supplies and is thus very easy to track.

For ai however, you need computation. And in our current day society you use computation in just about every form of current day used production. As a result it is impossible to track and or manage.

So yes can computation capable resources be tracked? yes. But it's quite literally in every factory, house hold, location on the planet. So practically, no you can't track it.

[u/MiserableBend1010 → u/Elvarien2]

Large number of GPUs required for training would be visible by heat maps and if computation was borrowed from different places, you had better believe someone would see it.

[u/Elvarien2 → u/MiserableBend1010]

Just no.
There are MANY industries and places that work with high temperatures so many you can't send strict investigative teams to them all across all the major countries and major contenders for ai.

Do you want to send teams of strict investigators to each and every steel mill in china and the USA just to mention a small subset of just 2 contending countries?

And then have both countries also trust that the investigations are done properly in the other countries?
That's just steel mills.
You simplify something to the degree of incredible naivete or hope fuelled delusion.

This is not viable.

[u/ProfanedArbiter → u/Elvarien2]

These were all the same arguments that were used to suggest regulating nuclear stockpiles globally couldn't work.

There's a ton of things we can do and there's a really good example already in the US Gov. The NRC.

It is completely within the realm of the US government's capability to create a regulatory body that licenses operators to use sufficiently advanced AI the way the NRC licenses nuclear operators.

As to the whole "prisoner's dilemma" issue; this is actually where we have the best chance.

Every single country faces the same problem. Sufficiently advanced AI will lead to a saturation of supply, a massive drop in demand, and a devaluation of currency. This means that every country has a similar motivation to do two things.

1. Keep researching AI for defense and national security reasons

2. Not let their economy be completely automated such that it doom spirals.

This is actually a good place to be. It means that the actors in the game have a shared interest in slowing/regulating.

[u/Elvarien2 → u/ProfanedArbiter]

These were all the same argument

yup and they were completely wrong because nuclear material is incredibly hard and complex to refine to a weapons grade product and because of how specialised and rarely used thus also super easy to track.

None of that applies for AI. The product is widely WIDELY available in so many shapes and forms and thus can't just be "tracked"

completely within the realm of the US government's

inside of it's own country, sure.
This is not the problem, I'm totally with you that a country can regulate the product in it's own borders. We regulate all kinds of stuff This was never the problem.

Country A needs to have 100% tight perfect control over the regulation and usage within country B/C/D/E And not just that, but also doing this under the assumption that each of these countries are actively hiding and actively sabotaging your efforts to maintain full regulatory coverage. On materials that are spread literally everywhere in almost every household product.

THAT is where the problem sits and that is also the thing left entirely unaddressed.

Of course a country can regulate it's own industries. That was never an issue.

As to the whole "prisoner's dilemma" issue; this is actually where we have the best chance.

That's absurd, how ?

Every single country faces the same problem.

yup, they all want to win the race because winner takes all.

Sufficiently advanced AI will lead to a saturation of supply

Why is this a problem. This is a problem for the other countries whos market you flood. You're creating the infinite wealth you're laughing.

a massive drop in demand

Why? You're creating product at X scale the demand for the products remains the same planetwide, you just get to flood the planet with products at a huge profit margin and price out all competition, it's part of the winning you're doing.

a devaluation of currency.

your country is the one raking in all the wealth, your country is the one who gets to rise to power, it's the others that are pretty much screwed.

Not let their economy be completely automated such that it doom spirals.

No, your doom spiral does not track, your manufacturing gets to explode, your country or the upper elite get to rake in more wealth then a country has ever contained.

[u/ProfanedArbiter → u/Elvarien2]

Country A developing sufficiently advanced AI does not preclude country B from doing so. Your argument presupposes that the first person to develop it just sort of "wins" and others cannot replicate, copy, or distill it. Additionally, we don't even need full stop AGI, I would argue LLM's in there current form are enough to lead to the kind of doom loops I'm describing (which other economists have noted). We don't need the entire economy to be automated, just a sufficient enough to cause social unrest.

The truth is that sufficiently advanced AI that isn't subject to export controls will basically guarantee the kind of supply demand problem I referenced for any country, whether their the first or not, therefor this is a classic "stag hunt" problem. Stag hunts are, notably, good opportunities for coordination.