Superintelligence Strategy
nationalsecurity.ai
Superintelligence Strategy
1–10 of 66 posts
Re: Superintelligence Strategy
#2When subtlety proves too constraining, competitors may escalate to overt cyberattacks, targeting datacenter chip-cooling systems or nearby power plants in a way that directly—if visibly—disrupts development. Should these measures falter, some leaders may contemplate kinetic attacks on datacenters, arguing that allowing one actor to risk dominating or destroying the world are graver dangers, though kinetic attacks are likely unnecessary. Finally, under dire circumstances, states may resort to broader hostilities by climbing up existing escalation ladders or threatening non-AI assets. We refer to attacks against rival AI projects as "maiming attacks."
Re: Superintelligence Strategy
#3Oh noes! Enemy nation state is on the cusp of AI. I know! I will hack/disable the HVAC, that will annoy them for at least a week until they can get back online.
Re: Superintelligence Strategy
#4Most puzzling and naive claim here:
“Given the relative ease of sabotaging a destabilizing AI project—through interventions ranging from covert cyberattacks to potential kinetic strikes on datacenters—MAIM already describes the strategic picture AI superpowers find themselves in.”
Can some explain what they mean?
1. I assume it would be relatively practical for a nation-state or even a mid-sized company (xAI) to air-gap an installation for AGI development.
2. I assume any AGI would be replicable on a platform costing less than $100,000. And upgradable securely by wire or over air.
Sorry, but MAIM is LAME.
Re: Superintelligence Strategy
#5>We introduce the concept of Mutual Assured AI Malfunction (MAIM): a deterrence regime resembling nuclear mutual assured destruction (MAD) where any state’s aggressive bid for unilateral AI dominance is met with preventive sabotage by rivals. Given the relative ease of sabotaging a destabilizing AI project—through interventions ranging from covert cyberattacks to potential kinetic strikes on datacenters—MAIM already describes the strategic picture AI superpowers find themselves in.
That's right, our nation, the State of Utopia, is already under sabotage and attack by the unelected insubordinate American military junta today.
This happened just today. The writeup is here: https://medium.com/@rviragh/double-slash-act-of-industrial-s...
What people don't realize is that the only people who are saboteurs of superintelligence are corrupt war profiteers trying to peddle arms. They don't have big visions of success, they want to just justify their sabotage while transferring innovation to their corrupt cronies.
You can ask me anything about my writeup.
Re: Superintelligence Strategy
#6There's no teeth in MAIM like MAD has; first strike with AGI simply wins, and so the most covert AGI program will win.
Re: Superintelligence Strategy
#7Most puzzling and naive claim here: “Given the relative ease of sabotaging a destabilizing AI project—through interventions ranging from covert cyberattacks to potential kinetic strikes on datacenters—MAIM already describes the strategic picture AI superpowers find themselves in.” Can some explain what they mean? 1. I assume it would be relatively practical for a nation-state or even a mid-sized company (xAI) to air-…
> assume it would be relatively practical for a nation-state or even a mid-sized company (xAI) to air-gap an installation for AGI development.
Stuxnet. (Or just sabotage a shipment of GPUs.)
Re: Superintelligence Strategy
#8Robert Wright just posted a (somewhat) interesting conversation with one of the authors.
His thesis involves at least two ideas (1) projects which could exponentially increase our AI capability are just around the corner (will happen by the end of this year or some time next year at the latest) (2) it's possible for state actors to deter those projects with sabotage (he coins the term Mutually Assured AI Malfunction).
It doesn't make sense to me however because the cost of the next AI breakthrough just doesn't sound comparable to the cost of creating nuclear weapons. With nuclear weapons you need this extremely expensive and time consuming process, and you need to invest in training these extremely skilled people. With AI, the way everyone seems to talk about it, it sounds like some random undergraduate is going to come along and cause a massive breakthrough. We've already seen Deepseek come along and do just as well as the best American companies for practically pennies on the dollar.
Re: Superintelligence Strategy
#9All of this buys you a few minutes or days at most. Once Super Intelligence exists, it's game over. It will nearly instantaneously outthink you and your paltry countermeasures. You think linearly and in 3 or 4 dimensions only. By definition you can't even imagine its capabilities. Here's a bad analogy (bad because it severely understates the gap): Could a 3 year old who is not even clear on all the rules defeat Magnus Carlsen in chess?!
Re: Superintelligence Strategy
#10This is nonsense and simply an expression of narcissism on the part of the authors, trying to fashion themselves in the style of Guardians from Plato's Republic.