Abstract: can encourage pro-alignment actions, inclinations by crypto-currency linked to values of free-energy in the observed, so presumably “obtainable” universe.

Quite a nascent notion, but an interesting and perhaps useful one. To "peg" the value of a cryptocurrency, to no human institution or inclination, whatever, but, that the value of the currency is in proportion to, either the total free energy in the universe, or, the amount of energy that humanity - or an individual of humanity, perhaps on a per capita basis - can make use of, at any time. Since we know that the amount of entropy in any closed system tends to increase, it follows, that the amount of orderly energy must be delimited; this represents a physically intrinsic "hedge on inflation".

In this way, it would seem, the phenomenon of inflation is, if not totally eliminated, then at least forever altered. Indeed, it is a curious question - one this one has not had time or inclination to analyze - whether stipulating that the availability or value of the currency should be increased, or decreased, with the increased availability of energy use and usable, over time. In any case, it would seem that such an accounting of wealth, based on a perhaps more-quantifiable source than the "feeling" of humans, would yield a more stable, hence a more generally useful, currency, one specially adapted for interstellar commerce, e.g. (this would be very valuable indeed, as, how else to manage exchange rates through the cosmos? Better that all agree only on the measurement of matter and energy, for any given time-slice).

Alternatively, we might define the value of the currency as a "defiance" of detected entropy; the less entropy, the more value of the currency. This not only is an encouragement to sustainability, but also, it encourages the survival of the human species. Since, whomever engages in existentially imperiling (sic) behavior increases the tendency to extinction - and thence, to entropy. Since they increase the likelihood of entropy, by each act in turn, they increase entropy disproportionately with their peers - and accordingly deserve less value than their peers. In this way, we "demonetize" demonstrably existentially risky behavior, and thereby discourage it - the only practical method to dissuade those prosperous in terms of mere "convention currency", from ultimately vitiating any possibility of prosperity, with respect to a more objective currency.

Some observations: any organization capable of engineering and promulgating such a system, is apt to be one able also to devise and encourage the use of, other pro-existential measures. Most notable in the context: alignment procedures. Whether, for example, this very forum is capable of so doing – provides a distinct indication of its capability, or lack, to encourage such. Would explain any shortcomings too.

To the concern, such an idea may be hijacked by an organization with no benevolent motives for alignment, e.g., Facebook AI – which, of course, would otherwise be, on the basis of their current actions, demonetized, for their blithe encouragement of dangers -  be it observed, that properly, do they may some currency which benefits them even in their hazard, this is not properly a counter-entropic currency; it simply won’t work. Conversely, did they do it properly, the necessary result is, they’re demonetized, or course-correct. That is: they hereafter tend not to endanger.

Whether this is possible the author cannot properly assert; it's only an idea. If you can make it happen, or can contact who can: please do. Might be nice if you drop a line before an IPO or some such. Whereas, if you think it’s absurd or unworkable, go ahead, and laugh. That’s what happens.


New Comment
2 comments, sorted by Click to highlight new comments since: Today at 9:49 PM

Downvoted, because there's no explanation of the mechanisms to "peg" the value.  You don't get to define the value of anything, it's all supply-and-demand, and what the marginal user is willing to trade for the currency.   

Otherwise, I'd create a new coin, "pegged" to my age in milliseconds, and be very wealthy instantly.  This (along with some handwaving about automatic supply/demand matching which worked great until it didn't) is roughly what Alameda/FTX tried to do.  And it'd even work, for quite some time, if it got to a level of common acceptance that justified it.  

The trivial way to establish value for the currency would be to provide some service. Any party that can seriously affect the entropy developments are very unlikely to be dependent on that service.

Goverments can engage in monetary control as they are about the same size as the economies to influence.

New to LessWrong?