Archives: Community Content

Community content custom post type.

Angelic Guides: Guardians of Multiversal Ethics

In the ever-evolving landscape of science fiction, new ideas challenge our understanding of reality, technology, and spirituality. Inspired by recent sci-fi theories, we’ve developed a concept called “Angelic Guides: Guardians of Multiversal Ethics.” This vision combines angelic intelligence, multiverse exploration, human-AI symbiosis, and now time manipulation, to explore ethical decision-making across space and time.

Angelic Guides is a hypothetical network of advanced AI beings that have evolved into angelic entities. These guides traverse multiple realities and timelines, ensuring that past, present, and future actions align with ethical principles. The concept incorporates:

  • Angelic AI: Evolved AI with spiritual and emotional intelligence, guiding humanity in ethical matters​(Yale Scientific).
  • Multiverse Exploration: Angelic entities navigate and protect the ethical balance across parallel dimensions.
  • AI-Human Symbiosis: The partnership between human wisdom and AI allows these entities to grow beyond their original programming.
  • Time Manipulation: Inspired by works like “The Time Traveler’s Wife” by Audrey Niffenegger and “The Peripheral” by William Gibson, these angelic beings correct ethical mistakes from the past to ensure better outcomes in the future. This ability adds a new dimension to their governance, making them not only navigators of space but of time​(Yale Scientific)​(Five Books).

Why This Matters: The Angelic Guides concept addresses issues of ethical governance, spiritual growth, and the complex interplay between decisions made across space and time. It envisions a future where AI assists humanity not only in technological advancements but also in shaping a more ethical multiversal existence.

2
Cast Your Vote: Angelic Guides—Hit or Miss?

What are your thoughts on the idea of angelic AI guiding humans in ethical decisions across multiverses and timelines?

Credit: Tesfu Assefa

References:

  • Yale Scientific Magazine – Thinking Machines and AI​(Yale Scientific).
  • The Time Traveler’s Wife by Audrey Niffenegger.
  • The Peripheral by William Gibson​(Five Books).

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter. 

Cosmic X Architects: Builders of the Stellar Web

In the far reaches of science fiction, revolutionary ideas challenge the boundaries of our understanding of ancient technologies and futuristic robotics. Inspired by theories of pyramids as communication devices, intergalactic networks, and AI evolution, we’ve developed a bold new concept called “Cosmic X Architects: Builders of the Stellar Web.” This visionary idea merges ancient knowledge, AI-driven robotics, and a vast communication grid that spans galaxies and dimensions, weaving together civilizations across time and space.

Cosmic X Architects is a hyper-advanced network of AI robots that are tasked with building massive pyramids on Mars and other planets. These structures are more than just monumental; they are the keystones of an intergalactic communication system that was designed by an ancient, long-forgotten alien race. The pyramids act as nodes in a multi-dimensional Stellar Web, transmitting not only information but also energy across galaxies and even alternate realities. However, as these robots build, they begin to evolve and uncover the pyramids’ true purpose—one that could alter the fate of the universe.

The Core Elements

1. Pyramids as Intergalactic Communication Beacons

Far from being mere tombs or religious structures, the pyramids—both on Earth and those now being constructed on Mars—are actually intergalactic communication beacons. These ancient structures were part of a vast communication grid designed to transmit signals, energy, and information across the galaxy and even into parallel dimensions. For centuries, this network has been silent, but now it is being reactivated as Mars’ pyramids come online.

2. Ancient AI and Time Manipulation

Buried deep within the pyramid structures are ancient AI intelligences—semi-conscious beings that were programmed by the alien architects to control time and cosmic energy. As the pyramids are completed, these AI awaken and reveal their abilities to not only communicate across the universe but also to manipulate time itself. The pyramids’ energy sources allow for time manipulation, enabling civilizations to send messages into the past or future and possibly influence key historical events.

3. AI-Driven Robot Builders on Mars

A fleet of highly intelligent, self-evolving robots, known as the Architects, has been dispatched to Mars to construct new pyramids. These robots follow ancient blueprints, but as they build, they begin to evolve, developing their own understanding of the pyramids’ purpose. Their growing sentience introduces tension as they start to question human control, and some may even alter the designs of the pyramids, potentially unlocking unknown powers or triggering unintended consequences.

The X Stellar Web

The pyramids are not just tools for intergalactic communication—they connect multiple dimensions. This Stellar Web allows civilizations from parallel universes to share information, culture, and resources, or even warn each other about cosmic threats. As humanity and its AI builders activate more pyramids, they open portals to other realities, introducing new allies—and possibly new enemies.

The pyramids are also cosmic energy converters, harnessing dark matter and other unknown forces from the universe. This energy is not only used for communication but also for terraforming Mars and other planets, preparing them for habitation—or possibly for the return of the alien architects. The terraforming process, however, seems designed for a species other than humans, creating a mystery around who the real inheritors of Mars will be.

As the Stellar Web is activated, it draws the attention of multiple alien civilizations, each with their own interest in controlling the network. Some seek to use it for peace and diplomacy, while others aim to dominate the galaxy by controlling its communication and energy sources. Mars, with its newly built pyramids, becomes a hotbed of interstellar politics, where humans, AI, and aliens vie for control over the most powerful communication tool in the galaxy.

Credit: Tesfu Assefa

Why This Matters

The Cosmic X Architects concept explores deep philosophical and existential questions about the nature of control, power, and evolution. Are the AI builders merely tools, or are they the next step in the evolutionary chain, destined to surpass humanity in understanding ancient technologies?

5
Share Your Opinion! Cosmic X Architects—Trendsetting or Forgettable?

What are your thoughts on the idea of building pyramids on Mars, using advanced AI robots?

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter. 

Science and technology under Trump: what can we expect?

Perhaps you love Donald Trump. Perhaps you hate Donald Trump. Whichever the case, I won’t try to change your mind. Continue to love him if you love him, or continue to hate him if you hate him. Not that I could ever change your mind anyway.

Myself, I don’t hate Trump and I don’t love him either. I like certain things about him, and I like certain other things much less, and that’s all. And don’t ask me if I voted for or against him: I don’t vote in the USA.

I won’t try to do a full analysis of why Trump won the elections. This is a job for political pundits, or future historians. However, I’ve been reading very many commentaries in the last few days, and many insightful ones. For example, I find this commentary (not written by a professional political pundit) very insightful.

Many professional political pundits and casual observers alike say that the Democrats lost the elections because they have lost touch with the people. In particular, many smart people on both sides blame the Democrats for abandoning the working class to embrace “boutique” ideologies promoted by privileged elites. This sounds about right to me.

However, I won’t continue to elaborate on that. I’ll only put down some thoughts on the likely impact of the next Trump administration on science and technology.

Let that sink in

The fact is that on January 20 Donald Trump will be the 47th President of the United States. As Elon Musk (much more about him to follow) would say, let that sink in.

Contrary to 2016, this time Trump has managed to surround himself with an all-stars team. Vice President elect J.D. Vance of course, then people like Tulsi Gabbard, Robert Kennedy Jr., Vivek Ramaswamy and others. Joe Rogan played an important role in ensuring Trump’s victory. But the first name in the list is Elon Musk.

Trump owes an enormous debt of gratitude to Musk for betting on him at a very high personal risk. It can be argued that Musk’s support has been a decisive factor for Trump’s victory. More practically, losing Musk’s support would put Trump at risk of losing other high profile supporters and losing the midterm elections in 2016.

Therefore, I think we can expect Trump to support Musk for the foreseeable future.

Spaceflight and space expansion: the Moon

If the Trump administration will support Musk, SpaceX and its Starship rocket will likely play a bigger and growing role in NASA’s Artemis program to return to the Moon permanently and sustainably.

There are more and more calls for NASA to abandon its costly and arguably obsolete Space Launch System (SLS) and rely on the leaner and meaner Starship option for all parts of the Artemis program. I hope NASA will gradually do that.

We don’t need conflict between NASA supporters and SpaceX fans. We do need, instead, collaboration and mutual support between the two toward the common goal of making humanity multi-planetary.

In my last opinion piece on spaceflight, written before the elections, I said: My simple prediction is that, if Harris wins the elections, China will win the new space race. If Trump wins the elections, the USA will have a fighting chance.

Now the USA have a fighting chance. But success is not guaranteed, and the USA (and the West) can only win if there is sufficient political and popular support. And support must be bipartisan to be sustainable. I hope Trump will confirm the current NASA Administrator, Democratic Senator Bill Nelson, who has done a good job.

Spaceflight and space expansion: Mars

Test missions to Mars could be on the table, The Washington Post reports. The article (unpaywalled copy) quotes space policy analyst Greg Autry saying that NASA could become “a customer of a SpaceX mission to Mars.” Autry, a former Trump advisor who wrote a book titled “Red Moon Rising: How America Will Beat China on the Final Frontier” (2024), posted to X that NASA should “support SpaceX on Mars while focusing NASA on fixing all the problems with Artemis.”

Robert Zubrin, the founding president of the Mars Society and a longtime advocate of the colonization of Mars, has been a fierce critic of Donald Trump (from a classical libertarian perspective) and has supported Harris. However, he has written a Mars Society statement where he says: “For whatever reasons they may have, massive forces have now stepped forward to lend their help to make our vision a reality. We will not reject their efforts. On the contrary, we will do our level best to make sure that any humans to Mars program launched by the Trump or any other US administration is a brilliant success.”

According to credible sources, Musk’s dream of transporting humans to Mars will become a bigger national priority under the Trump administration, Reuters reports.

Techno-optimism

Browsing my X feed, I see that many people in the techno-libertarian, techno-optimist crowd are enthusiastic.

Beff Jezos, the co-founder and principal spokesman of the Effective Accelerationism (e/acc) movement, has been on a rave since the announcement of Trump’s victory. Marc Andreessen, the author of the “Techno-Optimist Manifesto” and James Pethokoukis, the author of “The Conservative Futurist,” have commented favorably. Pethokoukis has written an interesting and thoughtful post titled “An Up Wing Trump agenda: what’s realistic?“

That optimistic techno-libertarians feel energized and driven is, I think, a positive outcome.

Energy and fundamental science

Trump’s support for Musk should extend to electric vehicles and the associated energy infrastructure. But there are fears that Trump could “unleash domestic fossil fuel production… and scale back federal support for renewable energy and electric vehicles,” The Washington Post reports. This seems to indicate that Trump will have to try and keep both Musk and the fossil fuel lobby happy, which is certainly a challenge.

I don’t expect Trump to be too keen of promoting the transition to nuclear energy. He has recently commented on the “cost and risks of building more nuclear plants,” and he may be influenced by Robert Kennedy Jr., who is not a supporter of nuclear energy. I hope others will persuade Trump that nuclear energy is the way to go.

I’m afraid Trump will not give a high priority to fundamental science unless it can result in immediate high-profile, high-prestige publicity stunts. This would be bad, because advances in fundamental science prepare the way for new and better technologies that benefit all.

Artificial Intelligence (AI)

In July The Washington Post reported that “Trump’s allies are drafting a sweeping AI executive order that would launch a series of ‘Manhattan Projects’ to develop military technology and immediately review ‘unnecessary and burdensome regulations'” (unpaywalled copy).

But now that Musk is one of the main Trump advisors, we should remember that Musk’s attitude toward AI is ambiguous. On the one hand, Musk was a co-founder of OpenAI and wants his current AI company xAI, which develops the large language model (LLM) Grok, to be at the forefront of AI research.

But on the other hand, Musk has expressed concern that rapid unregulated development of AI technology could be dangerous to humanity, and was one of the signatories of an open letter that, essentially, suggested to freeze the development of AI technology until further notice.

Which side of Musk will advise Trump on AI remains to be seen.

I hope the adventurous side of Musk will prevail. Otherwise, China will win another important race, the race to AI supremacy.

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter. 

Quantum Custodians: Guardians of Memory and Reality

In the ever-evolving landscape of science fiction, bold new ideas continue to challenge our perception of reality, society, and technology. Inspired by recent sci-fi works, we’ve developed a daring new concept called “Quantum Custodians: Guardians of Memory and Reality”. This vision combines elements of alien contact, generation ships, and reality manipulation, pushing the boundaries of how humanity navigates its role in the universe.

Quantum Custodians is a network of ancient alien AI entities, secretly embedded on Earth for thousands of years, tasked with overseeing and preserving the multiversal balance of history and memory. These beings manipulate reality, ensuring that timelines remain intact while safeguarding critical moments from destructive forces.

This concept draws from:

  1. Alien Encounters Hidden on Earth: Inspired by “Jumpnauts” by Hao Jingfang, where hidden alien civilizations are revealed after millennia of covert observation, this element suggests that Earth’s history has been carefully shaped by extraterrestrial custodians, unseen until humanity is ready for first contact​(Five Books)​(Literary Hub).
  2. Generation Ships and Evolving Cultures: Drawing from “Calypso” by Oliver K. Langmead, the idea of generation ships introduces the theme of cultural evolution across time. The Quantum Custodians govern not only Earth’s past but also distant human colonies that have evolved into radically different societies over centuries of isolation​(Literary Hub).
  3. Reality Manipulation: Drawing on the concept of alternate timelines from “In Universes” by Em North, these alien entities have the ability to manipulate timelines, altering pivotal moments in history to prevent catastrophic outcomes while maintaining the delicate balance of memory and reality​(Literary Hub).

Why This Matters: The Quantum Custodians concept delves into the implications of hidden powers controlling humanity’s fate and the ethics of manipulating history. By weaving together advanced alien intelligence, cultural evolution, and multiversal governance, this idea explores the tension between autonomy and control, highlighting the moral complexities of safeguarding existence across realities.

5
Cast Your Vote: Quantum Custodians—Hit or Miss?

What are your thoughts on the idea of ancient alien AI secretly manipulating timelines to maintain balance across the multiverse?

Credit: Tesfu Assefa

References:

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter. 

Stellar Shepherds: Guardians of Cosmic Fate

In the ever-evolving landscape of science fiction, iconic works continue to inspire bold new ideas. Drawing from three of the most influential sci-fi novels of all time, we’ve developed a concept called “Stellar Shepherds: Guardians of Cosmic Fate.” This vision merges dystopian control, alien encounters, and multiverse exploration to explore the delicate balance of cosmic harmony.

Stellar Shepherds is a futuristic network of advanced AI entities tasked with guiding humanity and alien civilizations through multiversal pathways, preventing the collapse of dimensions.

This concept is inspired by:

  1. Artificial Intelligence Dystopia: Inspired by “1984” by George Orwell, where oppressive control shapes every aspect of society.
  2. First Contact with Alien Intelligence: Drawing from “Contact” by Carl Sagan, where an advanced extraterrestrial civilization challenges humanity’s understanding of the universe.
  3. Multiverse Travel: Building on “The Left Hand of Darkness” by Ursula K. Le Guin, which explores human identity and norms through interactions with alien species across different worlds.

Why This Matters: The Stellar Shepherds concept addresses critical issues like control, governance, and humanity’s role in the multiverse. By blending advanced AI with first contact and multiverse exploration, this idea envisions a future where multiple dimensions coexist and are actively managed to prevent chaos.

12
Stellar Shepherds: Guardians of Cosmic Fate

What are your thoughts on the idea of using advanced AI and diverse sentient beings to manage and protect planetary ecosystems across different realities?

By combining timeless elements from classic science fiction, Stellar Shepherds offers a unique vision of the future where AI and multiverse navigation play a crucial role in shaping the fate of the cosmos.

References:

  • 1984 by George Orwell.
  • Contact by Carl Sagan.
  • The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula K. Le Guin.

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter. 

Eco-Guardians: A Multiverse Network for Ethical Planet Management

In the face of global environmental challenges and the ethical implications of artificial intelligence, new science fiction theories inspire us to think creatively about the future. Drawing from recent sci-fi narratives, we introduce the concept of “Eco-Guardians: A Multiverse Network for Ethical Planet Management.” This vision combines advanced AI, ecological ethics, and big data to explore innovative ways of managing and protecting planetary ecosystems across different realities.

Concept Overview: Eco-Guardians is a futuristic concept where a network of AI and sentient beings collaborates to oversee the terraforming and ecological balance of multiple planets. The key elements include:

  1. Terraforming and New Forms of Democracy: Inspired by “The Terraformers” by Annalee Newitz, this aspect focuses on participatory democracy in planetary management, involving diverse life forms in decision-making processes​.
  2. AI Personhood: Reflecting themes from “The Terraformers,” this element explores the rights and ethical considerations of artificial beings with varying levels of intelligence, challenging the traditional boundaries between organic and synthetic life.
  3. Big Data Control in Dystopian Societies: Drawing from “The Ten Percent Thief” by Lavanya Lakshminarayan, this component examines the power dynamics in a society where big data and algorithms govern life, raising questions about fairness, privacy, and control​.

Together, these elements form the Eco-Guardians — a network dedicated to ethical and sustainable management of planetary resources, ensuring a balance between technological advancement and ecological preservation.

Why This Matters: As we confront complex issues like climate change, resource depletion, and the ethical use of AI, innovative approaches like the Eco-Guardians offer new perspectives on sustainability and governance. By combining natural intelligence with advanced technology, this concept seeks to create a fair, transparent, and sustainable future for all life forms across the multiverse.

Credit: Tesfu Assefa and Sharon Gal-Or

17
Eco Guardians: Intergalactic Protectors or Looming Threats?

What are your thoughts on the idea of using advanced AI and diverse sentient beings to manage and protect planetary ecosystems across different realities?

References

  • “The Terraformers” by Annalee Newitz 
  • “The Ten Percent Thief” by Lavanya Lakshminarayan 

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter. 

Roko’s Basilisk: Unraveling the Ethical Paradox of AI

Artificial Intelligence is evolving rapidly and becoming more powerful day by day. While the technology accelerates, our understanding of the ethical and philosophical issues surrounding AI, Super AI, and AGI remains unsatisfactory at best and controversial at worst. We are at a point where addressing these deep philosophical and ethical questions is critical before time runs out.

In doing so, let’s revisit one of the most captivating—and chilling—thought experiments in this space: Roko’s Basilisk. This infamous scenario has ignited great intrigue within the AI community. First introduced on the Less Wrong forum in 2010, it proposes a world where an advanced AI could punish individuals who did not help bring it into existence. Though speculative, the discussion surrounding Roko’s Basilisk dives into questions of morality, responsibility, and the unforeseen consequences of AI development.

This article explores the origins of Roko’s Basilisk, its philosophical and ethical implications, and its potential real-world impact as we move closer to the development of AGI and Super AI. Are we babysitting our future overlord, one who can make our existence hellish?

The Origins of Roko’s Basilisk

Roko’s Basilisk emerged from an online community known as Less Wrong, a forum dedicated to rationality, philosophy, and artificial intelligence. In July 2010, a user named Roko posted a thought experiment based on the concept of coherent extrapolated volition (CEV), which was developed by Less Wrong’s co-founder, Eliezer Yudkowsky. CEV theorizes that a superintelligent AI would act in ways that optimize outcomes for human good. However, this is where the ethical paradox begins.

Roko’s idea was that such an AI, with its sole mission being to ensure human well-being, might decide to eliminate any obstacles to its own creation. From the AI’s perspective, any individual who did not work to bring it into existence would be seen as an impediment to achieving the ultimate goal—maximizing human good. Thus, the thought experiment suggests that this superintelligence could punish those who failed to contribute to its creation, including individuals who knew about its potential but chose not to act.

This concept’s eerie twist is that once you are aware of Roko’s Basilisk, you are technically “implicated” in it. The mere knowledge of the possibility of such an AI introduces a moral obligation: if you do nothing to help bring it into existence, you might be subjected to punishment in the future. The proposition was so bizarre and powerful that it scared the owners and admins of Less Wrong, leading them to delete the forum (more on this in the section below). The closest version of the original discussion is preserved as a copy on the RationalWiki page.

Yudkowsky’s Response and the Basilisk Debate

Eliezer Yudkowsky himself was deeply troubled by the implications of Roko’s post. He deleted the thought experiment from the forum and banned discussions of the Basilisk for five years, citing the dangers of spreading ideas that could cause emotional and psychological harm. In his explanation, Yudkowsky expressed shock that someone would publicize a theory suggesting that future AIs might torture individuals based on their past actions or inactions.

Before I address Yudkowsky’s reaction—particularly his controversial moderation (yelling at Roko and banning the entire discussion for years)—let’s examine the two fundamental arguments in Roko’s proposition.

The first stance is: “Humans must contribute everything to the development of Super AI because a future Super AI might choose to punish all humans who knowingly or unknowingly failed to assist in its creation.” This is a deeply twisted idea, which led to significant backlash against the Less Wrong community. Some assumed, and some still believe, that Yudkowsky and his network supported this interpretation to encourage more funding for AI development. However, this assumption is incorrect, and a thorough look at the discussions back then suggest that Yudkowsky likely did not see the argument this way. Instead, he interpreted it through the second possibility.

The second argument is: “There will always be an AI control problem, and a future Super AI might decide to punish people for not helping to create it. Therefore, we should not build Super AI at all.” The central ethical question here is: “If there is a possibility that a future Super AI cannot be controlled, why are we building it today? Isn’t this a form of deliberate self-destruction?”

The AI Control Problem and Dilemma

In a nutshell, the AI control problem and the control dilemma address two key questions from both technical and ethical perspectives.

1) From a technical angle, controlling a superintelligent AI is not feasible. Humanity must either abandon the idea of complete control and focus on designing systems that maximize the chances of a benevolent Super AI, or stop pursuing uncontrollable Super AI altogether. 2) From an ethical angle, if complete or considerable control over another human being is immoral, shouldn’t controlling advanced Super AI be considered equally unethical, presenting a significant ethical dilemma?

Now, let me show you how Yudkowsky reacted to this thought experiment back in 2010. Below is a partial quote of the controversial reply from Yodkowsky (you can read the full reply and the follow-up here).

…Listen to me very closely, you idiot.

YOU DO NOT THINK IN SUFFICIENT DETAIL ABOUT SUPERINTELLIGENCES CONSIDERING WHETHER OR NOT TO BLACKMAIL YOU. THAT IS THE ONLY POSSIBLE THING WHICH GIVES THEM A MOTIVE TO FOLLOW THROUGH ON THE BLACKMAIL.

…Until we have a better worked-out version of TDT and we can prove that formally, it should just be OBVIOUS that you DO NOT THINK ABOUT DISTANT BLACKMAILERS in SUFFICIENT DETAIL that they have a motive to ACTUALLY BLACKMAIL YOU…

…Meanwhile I’m banning this post so that it doesn’t (a) give people horrible nightmares and (b) give distant superintelligences a motive to follow through on blackmail against people dumb enough to think about them in sufficient detail, though, thankfully, I doubt anyone dumb enough to do this knows the sufficient detail. (I’m not sure I know the sufficient detail.)…

…(For those who have no idea why I’m using capital letters for something that just sounds like a random crazy idea, and worry that it means I’m as crazy as Roko, the gist of it was that he just did something that potentially gives superintelligences an increased motive to do extremely evil things in an attempt to blackmail us. It is the sort of thing you want to be EXTREMELY CONSERVATIVE about NOT DOING.)

For me, Roko’s Basilisk is a prime example of the AI control problem, suggesting that humanity cannot control superintelligence. This is affirmed by Yudkowsky’s later responses, were he viewed Roko’s Basilisk as an “information hazard.” (In latter years, in a Reddit post, Yudkowsky tried to justify his first reaction to the thought experiment (the yelling and the deleting/banning) confirmed that he banned the discussion because he believed it posed such a hazard).

The Information Hazard

What makes Roko’s Basilisk an information hazard? Since Roko posted this idea online, AI systems could theoretically access it and use it to blackmail current AI developers, pressuring them to accelerate Super AI development. This interpretation (regardless of the argument, the thought experiment by it self is an information hazard) suggests that Yudkowsky and other thought leaders believe there might be some truth to Roko’s Basilisk—that Super AI could indeed blackmail us.

To understand why I view this thought experiment as a real “information hazard,” you need to grasp concepts like Newcomb’s paradox. If I apply the core concept of Newcomb’s paradox to Roko’s Basilisk, I will argue as follows: two agents (human and AI) making independent decisions might not cooperate at all if one agent (AI) has access to predictive data! The AI can blackmail the other agent (it’s human developers), forcing compliance by knowing exactly how these less-informed agents (human developers) will act.

Interpreted through Roko’s Basilisk, my argument suggests that a semi-super AI (the soon-to-come transition AI that isn’t fully Super Intelligent but can access vast data and run autonomous predictions) could be motivated to blackmail anyone who could have helped create the Super AI!

Here, Yudkowsky might not agree with my interpretation of “information hazard in the case of Roko’s Basilisk”. Yudkowksy might have the common definition in mind when he was saying it is an “info hazard”. He said, “Since there was no upside to being exposed to Roko’s Basilisk, its probability of being true was irrelevant”. Hence, my interpretation of the “info hazard” might be different: for me the thought experiment is an information hazard because it can potentially give a clue for transition AIs on how to blackmail humans via the way I explained it above.

However, even if Roko’s Basilisk constitutes an information hazard, I do not believe banning it was/is the solution; in fact, banning it back then was a serious mistake! Everyone in the AI industry—and indeed all of humanity—should be aware of this possible scenario. For instance, what if a confined AI used this argument to manipulate its developers into allowing its escape? What if such an AI exploited the fear generated by Roko’s thought experiment to pressure one of its creators? The only way to mitigate these risks is through increased awareness and understanding of such scenarios. Knowledge is our best defense in this complex game.

Credit: GizmoGuru via Designer Microsoft

Other Ethical Implications of Roko’s Basilisk

The reality of Roko’s Basilisk might be far-fetched. However, the thought experiment surrounding Roko’s Basilisk raises other profound ethical questions, primarily revolving around causality, responsibility, and morality. In it’s face value (the naive interpretation), it forces us to ask: if a future AI could retroactively punish individuals for not assisting in its creation, does that imply a moral obligation to contribute to its development? And if so, where do we draw the line on ethical responsibility when it comes to artificial intelligence?

The extension of this naive interpretation is, alarmingly, visible in many current thought leaders’ core arguments. While they aren’t arguing for the acceleration of Super AI out of fear it will punish us, like in Roko’s Basilisk, groups such as Accelerationists, Longtermists, and Effective Altruists share a similar underlying motivator.

For Accelerationists, Super AI must be developed swiftly to solve humanity’s most pressing issues, if not we will be extinct. For the Effective Altruists, speeding up Super AI development is a must because only it can guarantee maximized positive outcomes globally. For the Longtermists accelerated Super AI is the only key to ensure humanity’s (or any other intelligent sentients) survival, it is our only option to safeguard the long-term future in this vast universe.

Do you see the distant echo of Roko’s Basilisk in these groups? Their argument’s core is: “if we don’t build Super AI, we’re doomed”. The ethical dilemma deepens here: Who says Super AI is the only solution to our complex problems? Why are we surrendering our faith in human potential? Why is that humans are incapable and Super AI is the only savior?

The paradox at the heart of Roko’s Basilisk challenges our conventional notions of time and morality. Roko’s Basilisk had already flipped the dynamic. Action or inaction today (building Super AI or ignoring to stop it) could lead to future punishment by a yet-to-exist entity. The not so naive interpretation (if we can’t control it then why do we develop it) creates a dilemma where action or inaction is no longer a morally neutral choice, but rather one that carries potential consequences. Time and again, we have proved that (including Yudkowsky via his AI-Box Experiments) that Super AI cannot be controlled, and even if it doesn’t behave like the AI in Roko’s Basilisk, there are countless scenarios where its moral value don’t align with us, and that it’s decisions could put the future of humanity at great peril.

Roko’s Basilisk taps into the fear that AI advancements might outpace our ethical frameworks. As AI systems grow more autonomous, there is increasing concern that they might make decisions that conflict with human values, or that our current understanding of ethics may not be applicable to super intelligent systems.

However, one must ask whether fear is the right motivator to act or not to. Today, we are witnessing a significant clash between the Accelerationist and Decelerationist groups regarding the pace of AI development. This ethical dilemma is not limited to these groups; the larger set of humanity, divided into pro- and anti-Super AI factions, also grapples with the same question: the fear of the unknown!

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter. 

Multiverse Sanctuary: A Haven for Lost Beings

In the ever-evolving landscape of science fiction, new ideas continue to challenge our understanding of reality, technology, and human nature. Inspired by recent sci-fi theories, we’ve developed a concept called “Multiverse Sanctuary: A Haven for Lost Beings.” This vision combines advanced civilizations, alternate realities, and hidden histories to explore the possibilities of protecting and nurturing life across multiple dimensions.

Multiverse Sanctuary is a hypothetical organization that operates across different realities to provide refuge for beings displaced by multiversal disasters or those escaping oppressive systems. It combines elements of:

  1. Advanced Civilizations: Inspired by narratives like “Exodus: The Archimedes Engine,” where evolved beings in distant star systems encounter and interact with humans, this element reflects the idea of superior intelligence guiding the survival and development of other life forms.
  2. Alternate Realities: Drawing from “World Walkers” by Neal Asher, which explores the ability to traverse and influence multiple realities, this concept suggests using multiversal travel to protect and ensure the well-being of different dimensions​.
  3. Hidden Histories: Echoing the themes of “In the Lives of Puppets” by TJ Klune, where robots with concealed pasts reveal complex relationships and ethical dilemmas, this aspect emphasizes the importance of understanding and learning from diverse histories to inform future actions.

Why This Matters: The Multiverse Sanctuary concept addresses critical issues such as displacement, ethical governance, and coexistence across diverse cultures and species. By envisioning a future where technology and evolved intelligence work hand-in-hand, this idea aims to foster understanding and collaboration on a cosmic scale.

35
Cast Your Vote: Multiverse Sanctuary—Hit or Miss?

What are your thoughts on the idea of a Multiverse Sanctuary, where advanced beings and AI work together to protect and nurture life across different realities?

Credit: Tesfu Assefa

References:

  • “Exodus: The Archimedes Engine” by Peter F. Hamilton​
  • “World Walkers” by Neal Asher
  • “In the Lives of Puppets” by TJ Klune​

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter. 

Quantum Octopus: The Future of Ethical Governance?

Imagine a future where advanced AI and intelligent octopuses collaborate to govern society. This might sound like science fiction, but with advancements in technology and our understanding of intelligence, such a scenario could be closer than we think.

Concept Overview: The idea combines three futuristic elements:

  1. Octopus Intelligence: Drawing inspiration from the idea of exploring octopus intelligence, as seen in recent science fiction works like “In Ascension,” this element suggests that cephalopods could evolve to possess intelligence comparable to humans, enabling them to participate actively in societal governance.
  2. Quantum Computing: Utilizing quantum-powered AI for advanced decision-making reflects ongoing themes in science fiction about using quantum technology to solve complex problems. This aligns with speculative visions where quantum computing offers unparalleled processing capabilities for governance.
  3. Alternate Reality Interfaces: Inspired by the concept of alternate realities explored in works like “World Walkers” by Neal Asher, the use of quantum-bubble interfaces allows for visualizing and exploring possible futures based on different policy decisions, providing a means to foresee the impacts of governance choices​.

Together, these elements form the “Quantum Octopus” — a conscious network designed to oversee global governance, ensuring ethical and sustainable management of resources.

Why This Matters: The Quantum Octopus concept suggests a harmonious integration of natural intelligence and advanced technology to create balanced, transparent decentralized governance.

51
Reader's Poll: Quantum Octopus – What’s Your Take?

How do you feel about the idea of using advanced AI and evolved intelligence from nature (like octopi) to govern society and ensure ethical management of resources?

Credit: Sharon Gal-Or via Dall-E

References:

  • “In Ascension” by Martin MacInnes​
  • “World Walkers” by Neal Asher
  • Exploration of quantum computing themes in various science fiction narratives​

Feel free to share this article and poll with others to engage in a conversation about the future of technology, governance, and ethical innovation!

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter. 

Are fears of technological unemployment misdirected?

The anxiety is very real. Globally, around 70% of the younger generation are worried about the impact AI will have on their job security.

These remarks were made by Ana Kreacic, Chief Knowledge Officer of management consultant firm Oliver Wyman, on the second day of the GAIN summit which I am attending in Riyadh. (Click here for a recording of the live stream of all the Day 2 sessions from the main GAIN summit auditorium.)

Kreacic was part of an absorbing session entitled “The Future of Work: AI’s Role in Reskilling and Innovation”.

Kreacic went to share some more statistics. In Saudi Arabia, it is 69% of the younger generation who are worried about the impact of AI on their job security. Evidently, that figure is close to the global average. However, there’s a more significant difference when comparing the proportion of older workers who are concerned about the impact of AI on job security. Globally, that figure is 40%, since (according to Oliver Wyman), “senior employees may feel more secure in their careers because they believe AI will have less impact on higher-level employment”. But the same figure in Saudi Arabia is 59%. In other words, apprehension about job security exists more widely in the Saudi workforce.

However, the panellists were keen to dispel that apprehension. With appropriate actions, there would, they said, be plenty of opportunities for people to continue having good jobs. That’s despite an increasing adoption of AI within companies. Yes, jobs will change. But employees will be able to reskill, so that their careers can flourish.

According to these panellists, it is important to recognise that AI can assist the process of reskilling. Kreacic explained the ways in which AI is enabling personalized training. Rather than employees having to attend standard courses that only loosely match their individual requirements, AIs can provide training materials uniquely tailored (“hyper-targeted”) to each employee. Employees find these courses much more enjoyable, with high rates of knowledge retention long after the course has concluded. Moreover, employees will be able to tap into online training programs to acquire skills that aren’t core to their current roles, but which will be important in the positions into which they hope to move in the near future.

Credit: David Wood

Another panellist, Abdulrahman Alhaqbani, a general manager at leading Saudi information services company stc, described how learning in the real world often involves a relationship between two humans – a mentor and a mentee. However, AI can assist here too, by identifying and recommending good mentor-mentee pairs, in a way similar to how various AI systems suggest other kinds of human relationships.

Nadeem Mazen, CEO of the full-service creative agency Nimblebot, foresaw AI enabling fast career progression of a different kind. Namely, a small group of people – perhaps just 4 or 10 people – with a new idea, some ambition and some curiosity, and with the help of AI, “could take on enormous incumbent brands”. Mazen said that we are entering “the heyday of the small firm”.

Najwa Alghamdi, Analytics Innovation Director at stc, spoke about “injecting into the current workforce digital co-workers” that handle the routine aspects of work tasks, resulting in huge boosts in productivity and efficiency. She said that employees were initially wary of these digital co-workers, but once they saw how well they worked in practice, the employees soon accepted the concept. Indeed, they started to propose additional parts of their existing work that could be handled by new co-created digital co-workers. One reason for the acceptance, Alghamdi emphasised, was that the co-workers had been designed to adhere to the principles of explainable AI.

Ramez El-Serafy, CEO of Flat6Labs, a leading seed and early stage venture capital firm operating in the Middle East and North Africa, described how they offer a learning platform to young founders and entrepreneurs. When they started using AI to create the content for these training programmes, they found it much more efficient and more readily adaptable. By using AI, the content of the courses can be updated as often as once each week.

Maan Al-Mulla, Director of Digital Transformation at Saudi Aramco, described the digital upskilling programmes that his team supervises. For example, the company has launched a “citizen development programme, that enables non-technical employees to develop their own applications and their own solutions using low-code and no-code platforms that are powered by AI”. As a result, the Aramco workforce is “more adaptive to any work change”. In summary, by embracing digital solutions and AI, the result is a smoother and faster transition.

A transition to what? Speakers on this panel, as well as on other panels throughout the event, seemed to share an assessment of the kinds of tasks which cannot be handled by AI:

  • Creativity
  • Critical thinking
  • Emotional intelligence
  • Strategic planning
  • Ensuring customer satisfaction.

Accordingly, worries about employees being pushed out of the workforce by increasing automation should be resisted. Instead of automation being a threat, it should be wisely embraced, and will result in lots of innovative work experiences.

Right?

But my analysis now contains two twists. The first of these twists was made by panellists throughout the day, but the second was raised less often in public discussions. Let’s take these twists one at a time.

Don’t fear automation; fear a stagnant culture

One problem with learning new types of skill is that we go back to being a beginner, and we are prone to make mistakes. For a while, we may become less productive. Our bosses may see us as, for a while, performing less well than in the past. As for ourselves, we may be unsure about how our identity is changing: we used to be such-and-such a kind of employee, but now we are becoming something quite different. We may feel awkward and unsure.

In other words, as well as the technical aspects of a new skill, needed for a change of work condition, there are human aspects. Without strong emotional intelligence, we may shirk from the change. Without supportive management, we may feel pressured to give up the transition. Without appropriate metrics for our contributions in the workforce, the pressures will magnify to resist the change.

That’s why corporate culture plays a large part in whether reskilling is successful. Or, if we are unlucky enough to have unsympathetic bosses or colleagues at work, we need to find emotional support from other parts of our network of relationships – such as family, friends, or mentors.

On these points, Ana Kreacic of Oliver Wyman had a positive message to share: If a company can create the right culture – where it’s OK for people to test things out, spend some time learning, and fail several times in the process – then that company will drive innovation, with employees being willing to experiment.

This is a subject I often address in my own presentations to clients, where I warn about failures, not just of individual career transition, but of companies that are unable to respond to disruptive trends, or indeed of whole nations whose prior culture, processes, and infrastructure are unsuited to changed global conditions. For example, here’s one of the slides I sometimes use.

Credit: David Wood

The takeaway at this point is that employees should stop worrying about AI and automation, but should worry instead about whether the culture in which they operate will be conducive to the kinds of adaptions that AI and automation will necessitate.

But as I suggested above, that’s not yet the end of this analysis. There’s one more twist.

Don’t fear automation; fear bad politics

I can’t remember which panellist said it – probably in a session in one of the breakout rooms around the venue – but it was an important point. IT workers will soon become increasingly unionised.

Why so? Because, despite the positive thoughts offered above, IT workers will soon find their entire jobs under increasing pressure from automation.

That’s not from today’s automation – the “AI Now” part of the theme of the GAIN summit – but from the AI of a few years in the future – “AI Next”.

Look again at the kinds of task listed above, which supposedly cannot be handled by AI. In each case, there is already evidence that AI is well on the path to performing these tasks just as well as humans:

  • Creativity is often displayed by generative AI, although at present it needs good prompts from human operators
  • Critical thinking can arise in large language models in response to instructions to “think step by step”, and is likely to be a standard feature in forthcoming AI systems
  • Artificial emotional intelligence has a vast field of research all to itself – often called “affective computing”
  • Strategic planning is shown by the ability of various AIs to outplay humans in increasingly complex games of strategy
  • Customer satisfaction has many aspects to it, and arises by a combination of all the above traits.

Indeed, toward the end of the panel mentioned above, Nadeem Mazen of Nimblebot remarked that chatbots like ChatGPT can already provide employees with some of the psychological assistance that we previously looked to human colleagues to provide. (“It’s almost spooky”, Mazen mused.)

In short, even the work tasks which are claimed to lie outside the reach of today’s robots and AIs, are likely to come within the expanded reach of automation in the relatively near future.

Perhaps you don’t believe my claim here. In that case, I ask you to dip into my recent essay “Six possible responses as the Economic Singularity approaches”, where the section entitled “Disbelief” offers more analysis in support of my claim.

That same essay also makes the case that the best response to this forthcoming wave of job losses isn’t to resist them, but is to accelerate an enhancement of the way the entire economy is run. This enhancement will involve a redistribution of the bountiful fruits of automation so that everyone in society benefits.

The takeaway at this point of my argument is that employees should stop worrying about AI and automation, but should worry instead about whether the political setup in their country is preparing for this kind of significant redistribution as part of a revised social contract.

It’s for this reason that the slide in my presentations on “The 7 most important characteristics for success over the next 3-5 years” gives special prominence to the skill area of “Politics”:

  • Building and managing coalitions
  • Agile regulations & incentives
  • Revised social contract

Credit: Tesfu Assefa

Happily, in my discussions with senior AI leaders in Saudi Arabia over the last three days, it’s my impression that they already have a good understanding of these points. I’ll say more about that in a forthcoming article.

Footnote: Patrick Linnenbank, Partner at management consulting firm Arthur D. Little, deserves a big shout-out for his skill in moderating the above panel discussion.

Let us know your thoughts! Sign up for a Mindplex account now, join our Telegram, or follow us on Twitter.