I
Hi LessWrong community,
I’m Rufo Guerreschi, the Coordinator, Convenor and Spokesperson of the Coalition for a Baruch Plan for AI (CBPAI).
Following our launch last December 18th, I’m excited to introduce myself here and share our initiative with this community, which has long been engaged in discussions on AI alignment, governance, and existential risk.
The accelerating capabilities of AI pose unprecedented risks—not just of misuse, but of loss of control. Many leading AI scientists warn that catastrophic risks could materialize within just a few years, or even “at any time.” Meanwhile, an immense AI-driven concentration of power and wealth is unfolding, pulling the world into an AI arms race with little meaningful oversight or coordination.
Current AI global governance initiatives—whether led by the U.S., China, the UN, or other states—are vastly inadequate in their scope, inclusivity, and urgency.
Inspired by the historical Baruch Plan for nuclear governance of 1946, our Coalition argues that nothing short of a new extraordinarily bold, global, federal intergovernmental organization is needed to manage AI’s existential risks while ensuring its benefits are equitably shared.
But we can’t rely on treaty-making as usual, as failure would be guaranteed, as seen in treaty negotiations for climate change and nuclear ever since the failure of the Baruch Plan - and time is extremely short.
We can't rely either on China and the US defining such a treaty, even in the best case scenario. Until a suitable treaty is finalized and made public, we could not assess in any way the actual progress (as it happened for the Baruch Plan). And then too other states would refuse to comply with the extremely strict bans and oversight regime that will be required of they were now full part of its definition.
We must rely instead on the historically proven model of the intergovernmental constituent assembly (as used to create the US and Swiss federations), except adapted for "geopolitical realism" to give China, the US and other powerful states more decision-making power in the treaty-making process and more power and wealth in the sharing of AI benefits. We need to rely on such structured, high-bandwidth, and time-bound diplomatic process modeled on the U.S. Constitutional Convention of 1787.
Trump would make himself and America much greater than they are today while avoiding an immense risk to the lives of all Americans, his own and his kids. Meanwhile, President Qi would vastly advance China's well-being, progress, safety and social harmony.
If they succeed, both leaders will go down in history as the greatest statesmen ever, not only for having prevented the greatest risk humanity has ever faced but also for harnessing it to establish a durable global governance organization that guarantees to expand well-being, safety and abundance via ever-more advanced, safe AI.
We recently launched an Open Call for a Coalition for a Baruch Plan for AI. We invite AI researchers, policymakers, governance experts, and concerned citizens to join us in shaping this initiative.
If you’d like to contribute ideas, critique our approach, or discuss alternatives, I’d love to hear from you. LessWrong has a unique culture of rigorous analysis, and I’d be eager to engage in thoughtful discussion about how global AI governance should be structured.
Below is our most recent blog post, cross-posted for discussion.
From a Mad Race to Superintelligence to a Global Treaty for Safe AI for All
Looking forward to your thoughts!