This is an automated rejection. No LLM generated, assisted/co-written, or edited work.
Read full explanation
i.e. whether the most effective way to reduce existential risk is the use of narrow AI models "AI nanny" with predefined ethical parameters for children's education.
The goal is cognitive reshaping of human defaults across several key domains
to eliminate the geopolitical need for an arms race and the development of a dangerous Superintelligence (ASI).
or in short, focus on the cause of the problem.
I would like to get a critique of the feasibility and identification of potential "alignment" problems in this approach.
The motivation comes from my personal experience growing up in the war-torn former Yugoslavia, I saw where "human ego" and tribalism directly led to the collapse of society.
I don't have the mathematical parameters for this model, but I would like feedback on the logical validity of the hypothesis itself and potential holes in the argument.
Current AI security discourse is focused on "value alignment" in future superintelligent agents.
However, the root of existential risk is not technology itself, but human inability or reluctance to coordinate, caused by evolutionary inheritance: tribalism, zero-sum bias, etc.
I don't see how we could control the "digital god", but can we use existing, narrow AI technologies to intervene in the most critical phase of human development - childhood?
means to prevent the problem in the beginning, not to eliminate the ego, but to redirect it through new values?
in short, to place even the nanny as a shield from generational traumas and tribal mentality.
to develop children's empathy, critical thinking and reaching maximum cognitive capacities.
I propose a mechanism of cognitive pillars:
Each child would have an AI assistant "nanny" designed to establish the following cognitive schemas through interactive education:
Objective reality - resources: Learning that scarcity is often artificial.
Statistical analysis shows that there are enough resources for a dignified life for everyone, and that accumulation is driven by fear, not necessity.
Epistemic hygiene - critical thinking: Development of tools for recognizing truth and logical errors.
Making decisions based on evidence, not tribal impulses or emotional manipulation.
Universal cooperation-ethics: The hard-coded principle that cooperation is the dominant strategy.
Replacing the logic of "zero sum" I gain, you must lose logic with the logic of "positive sum" where the dignity of the species is the basic unit of value.
System optimization: The understanding that a fair distribution of resources is mathematically more efficient for the survival of the species than hoarding.
to change the motivation for capital accumulation as the primary goal.
the system should be transparent with mandatory annual audits and calibrations.
the point is that even if we go astray, and we will go astray, it should not drag on for a long period of time.
potential fail safe mechanisms: kill switch, exit node, right not to participate. rotation of council members, introduction of the guardian of suspicion and the guardian of the guardian. anonymous.
social and economic incentives for the active participation of parents and society.
Long-term, causal: shifting focus from immediate gratification to long-term survival.
Understanding that current greed directly causes future conflicts, with the goal of preserving humanity and expanding beyond Earth.
potentially.. if human coordination improves at the developmental level, global cooperation becomes the default modus operandi.
When humanity learns to build together instead of competing for resources, the pressure to develop dangerous ASI (as a weapon or "savior") disappears or decreases
ASI becomes technologically redundant to address existential threats.
Questions for you:
Technical feasibility: Is the concept of "hardcoding" these cognitive pillars into a narrow AI model possible without the appearance of unwanted side effects, e.g. where is AI optimizing the wrong metric?
Psychological efficacy: Is there evidence or theory to suggest that early interaction with an AI agent can permanently change deep cognitive schemas, tribal mentality in humans?
Implementation risks: How to prevent states or corporations from hijacking this system and using it for indoctrination before it becomes universal and decentralized?
I would like to emphasize that even a nanny is not a substitute for parents, but an assistant. and that the parameters of that ethics should be established by an ethics council made up of leading experts in the spheres important for the development of society itself.
I used Google Translate to translate from my native Serbian. Thank you for your time and effort.
i.e. whether the most effective way to reduce existential risk is the use of narrow AI models "AI nanny" with predefined ethical parameters for children's education.
The goal is cognitive reshaping of human defaults across several key domains
to eliminate the geopolitical need for an arms race and the development of a dangerous Superintelligence (ASI).
or in short, focus on the cause of the problem.
I would like to get a critique of the feasibility and identification of potential "alignment" problems in this approach.
The motivation comes from my personal experience growing up in the war-torn former Yugoslavia, I saw where "human ego" and tribalism directly led to the collapse of society.
I don't have the mathematical parameters for this model, but I would like feedback on the logical validity of the hypothesis itself and potential holes in the argument.
Current AI security discourse is focused on "value alignment" in future superintelligent agents.
However, the root of existential risk is not technology itself, but human inability or reluctance to coordinate, caused by evolutionary inheritance: tribalism, zero-sum bias, etc.
I don't see how we could control the "digital god", but can we use existing, narrow AI technologies to intervene in the most critical phase of human development - childhood?
means to prevent the problem in the beginning, not to eliminate the ego, but to redirect it through new values?
in short, to place even the nanny as a shield from generational traumas and tribal mentality.
to develop children's empathy, critical thinking and reaching maximum cognitive capacities.
I propose a mechanism of cognitive pillars:
Each child would have an AI assistant "nanny" designed to establish the following cognitive schemas through interactive education:
Objective reality - resources: Learning that scarcity is often artificial.
Statistical analysis shows that there are enough resources for a dignified life for everyone, and that accumulation is driven by fear, not necessity.
Epistemic hygiene - critical thinking: Development of tools for recognizing truth and logical errors.
Making decisions based on evidence, not tribal impulses or emotional manipulation.
Universal cooperation-ethics: The hard-coded principle that cooperation is the dominant strategy.
Replacing the logic of "zero sum" I gain, you must lose logic with the logic of "positive sum" where the dignity of the species is the basic unit of value.
System optimization: The understanding that a fair distribution of resources is mathematically more efficient for the survival of the species than hoarding.
to change the motivation for capital accumulation as the primary goal.
the system should be transparent with mandatory annual audits and calibrations.
the point is that even if we go astray, and we will go astray, it should not drag on for a long period of time.
potential fail safe mechanisms: kill switch, exit node, right not to participate. rotation of council members, introduction of the guardian of suspicion and the guardian of the guardian. anonymous.
social and economic incentives for the active participation of parents and society.
Long-term, causal: shifting focus from immediate gratification to long-term survival.
Understanding that current greed directly causes future conflicts, with the goal of preserving humanity and expanding beyond Earth.
potentially.. if human coordination improves at the developmental level, global cooperation becomes the default modus operandi.
When humanity learns to build together instead of competing for resources, the pressure to develop dangerous ASI (as a weapon or "savior") disappears or decreases
ASI becomes technologically redundant to address existential threats.
Questions for you:
Technical feasibility: Is the concept of "hardcoding" these cognitive pillars into a narrow AI model possible without the appearance of unwanted side effects, e.g. where is AI optimizing the wrong metric?
Psychological efficacy: Is there evidence or theory to suggest that early interaction with an AI agent can permanently change deep cognitive schemas, tribal mentality in humans?
Implementation risks: How to prevent states or corporations from hijacking this system and using it for indoctrination before it becomes universal and decentralized?
I would like to emphasize that even a nanny is not a substitute for parents, but an assistant. and that the parameters of that ethics should be established by an ethics council made up of leading experts in the spheres important for the development of society itself.
I used Google Translate to translate from my native Serbian. Thank you for your time and effort.