Nobody takes them seriously, for the same reason nobody takes extreme anarcho-libertarians seriously, for the same reason nobody takes (or should take) extreme doomers seriously.
Have you read David Runciman’s The Handover? It proposes this same basic architecture that AI is of a broader class of Artificial Agents (AA) that includes nation-states and corporations. Each is a corporate entity that acts on behalf of and also shapes its principal. I think this is ontologically true.
It also means that the broader history of corporate law provides a basis for AI safety research. For example we can treat models and agents as distinct and for each stable agent (things that are directed for a goal) have registration and licensure while for models we’d have safety certification
Libertarian accelerationists specifically call governance aka “regulation” Anathema. So that’s the line where the fight will occur.
Nobody takes them seriously, for the same reason nobody takes extreme anarcho-libertarians seriously, for the same reason nobody takes (or should take) extreme doomers seriously.
Have you read David Runciman’s The Handover? It proposes this same basic architecture that AI is of a broader class of Artificial Agents (AA) that includes nation-states and corporations. Each is a corporate entity that acts on behalf of and also shapes its principal. I think this is ontologically true.
It also means that the broader history of corporate law provides a basis for AI safety research. For example we can treat models and agents as distinct and for each stable agent (things that are directed for a goal) have registration and licensure while for models we’d have safety certification
I have not, I'll check it out.!
I do think corporate law, and generally the entire apparatus we have, is underrated here as a solution to alignment.