RandomLensman

I have some fairly good understanding actually, hence my point about just data vs orders. Not sure what you want me to take from your link specifically?

You want transactions to be easily reversible?

Payment for order: what data was sold (or do you mean the orders as data)?

You mean broker as in a pure broker, not broker-dealer?

What about policing algorithms, for example? Who'd do that and how?

Who provides liquidity? Just natural supply and demand?

Would you expect exchanges to permit everyone to trade directly? How would you police the consequences of, for example, no entry policing? How would you want to police requirements if everyone is on the exchange or some venue (e.g., around algorithms)?

But complexities of any new system aside, what is an example of a cashing in of an unneeded example in terms of an activity?

Is there some pricing going on with infinite dividend and funding legs and/or is there sort of supply and demand "cost of carry" thing in the perpetual world?

Then AI might also struggle to find a big enough market, no? Or will it move into things like plumbing?

By what measure of productivity?

Not sure how that gets specialized off-line knowledge in certain manual tasks, for example.

AI is far from having all human knowledge - long way to go to run everything in the economy by (robotic) agents.

I would love to see productivity effects in revenues/profits and risk (how much more revenue/profit per head, for example) - in the end commits etc. aren't quite enough.

True, but then the moonlanding wasn't possible on foot.

Is AI at the stage that it can also point out all interesting things to study and then solve them? Otherwise humans would still be able and needed for progress.

Why is not like changing to a different type of vessel for the voyage? Unless and until it is all AI in closed system, could direct machines where to look etc.

Things that are not intelligent could still warrant very strong safety measures.

Depending on the risks associated, the complexity and effort of certain containment measures would also not neccessarily be something that could be used to brush them aside.

Yes, but I'd say there is also responsibility attached to the deployment and use (be that, e.g., for quant fund performance, behaviour on exchanges, ...). In a way, using an algorithm is the decision humans make that matters.

Why would that need a new way? Or do you mean that no-one ever spun up anything at all (e.g., agent zero was never spun up or allowed to be spun up by anyone)?

It's always people - I at least have not seen a corporation deciding itself.

How to make sure it doesn't evolve into some sort of Library of Babel of science?

It isn't some law of nature. Humans/societies have agency - what AI should or should not be used is up for debate and decisions. It might even wind up the other way around that using AI is the special case - who knows.

What would you accept as evidence there? Are, for example, the first names/words for colors from scratch?

So your view is that everything was there at the creation of the universe (it's a possible view, of course)? Or are there any "things" that can create ideas from scratch?

Unless everything was there before humans existed humans created some ideas etc from scratch and not just remixed and copied.

At what level LLMs are is then an entirely separate discussion, I think.

Not so sure. Was everything already "there" before humans existed?

What's the success rate there?

How do other larger countries manage it without scanners?

Could just draft people, for example. On a local level there is also more knowledge in voters that can be compared to counts etc.

Hand counting paper ballots by a somewhat random assembly of people might make that less easy (as people might need to collude). Also, why would the ledgers be accessible to everyone counting? Other than using them to check off who voted/eligibility when a voter shows up, what are they needed for at the counting stage?

Maybe yes, maybe no. Dualism, or panpsychism aren't totally dead, I think.

Physics is computable in the probabilistic/simulation sense , not in terms of ability to predict, though.

No, why would that be the consequences of regulation?

Booz Allen actually makes what now? The Sentinel is still in development by Northrop Grumman and there is some program management done by Booz, no?

Gut bacteria have an influence on humans in various ways. Some parasites can change/influence behavior in hosts (I think there is a fungus that can take over an insect's nervous system and make it climb up something).

What would "super ai" mean in terms of intelligence? How would that manifest? Could it somehow predict which atom decays next in a radioactive material?