Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

3rd party user creation test and 1% treaty ROI analysis, etc. #161

Merged
merged 20 commits into from
Mar 23, 2024
Merged
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
20 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
ec74b68
Add cost estimation and FAQ answering common questions
mikepsinn Mar 18, 2024
113c86b
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/develop' into develop
mikepsinn Mar 18, 2024
37d6d91
Add analysis, estimations, and examples of AI in medical progress
mikepsinn Mar 19, 2024
fbe9323
Add analysis, estimations, and examples of AI in medical progress
mikepsinn Mar 19, 2024
94bf023
User creation demo. `FDAiClient.js` to handle XMLHttpRequest and API …
mikepsinn Mar 19, 2024
56f500d
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/develop' into develop
mikepsinn Mar 19, 2024
fdfd2b2
Updated URL helpers in login and API calls
mikepsinn Mar 19, 2024
4598d7f
Logical proof and AI risk
mikepsinn Mar 21, 2024
22e47a8
Add post user method in openapi.yml
mikepsinn Mar 21, 2024
167fa7e
@nrwl modules have been updated to ^15.9.7. Additionally, some other …
mikepsinn Mar 21, 2024
750603b
Add proposal for VitaDAO's DIH initiative
mikepsinn Mar 21, 2024
1154111
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/develop' into develop
mikepsinn Mar 21, 2024
9c7db1b
Python script for military spending projections and existential risk …
mikepsinn Mar 22, 2024
6666246
Refactor military spending chart and enhance projections
mikepsinn Mar 22, 2024
9af0c34
Added 'requirements.txt' for dependencies, Code for creating the mili…
mikepsinn Mar 22, 2024
81b449f
Jupyter notebook to document the analysis interpretation and derivati…
mikepsinn Mar 23, 2024
3f41b00
Expand opportunity cost analysis and update VitaDAO proposal document
mikepsinn Mar 23, 2024
acc2c42
Integrate NIH funding data and add lobbying ROI analysis
mikepsinn Mar 23, 2024
387a7b5
Logical proof premises, propositions, proof, and counterarguments. Ad…
mikepsinn Mar 23, 2024
02abf6e
Merge branch 'FDA-AI:develop' into develop
mikepsinn Mar 23, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Prev Previous commit
Next Next commit
Logical proof premises, propositions, proof, and counterarguments. Ad…
…ded several footnotes to support the claims and propositions.
mikepsinn committed Mar 23, 2024
commit 387a7b5b2d24e6643761beee4eed157d1862cad9
53 changes: 0 additions & 53 deletions docs/treaty/logic-proof.md

This file was deleted.

111 changes: 111 additions & 0 deletions docs/treaty/logical-proof.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
# Logical Proof

Why it is logical for the nations and citizens of the world to sign the 1% Treaty and reallocate 1% of military spending to medical research each year:

## Axioms:
1. Reducing death and suffering is a worthy goal.
2. War increases death and suffering.
3. Medical research reduces death and suffering.
4. Resources spent on war cannot be spent on medical research.
5. Countries act in their self-interest.

## Premises:
1. The world has finite resources.
2. Resources spent on war are 20 times greater than resources spent on medical research.[^1]
3. AI technology developed for warfare could lead to catastrophic outcomes like a Skynet scenario.[^2]
4. People generally prefer resources to be used for medical research over warfare.[^3]
5. No individual country can unilaterally reallocate war resources to medical research without risking attack from other countries.
6. Defense companies globally spend between $200 million and $300 million annually on lobbying efforts.[^4]
7. Military contractors globally receive between $800 billion to $1 trillion annually from government contracts.[^5]
8. The world currently has 13,000 nuclear weapons, enough to cause between 13 and 130 "extinction-level events" when accounting for nuclear winter effects.[^6]
9. Lobbyists are motivated by financial incentives and will work for the highest bidder.[^7]

## Propositions:
1. An international treaty where all countries allocate 1% of military budgets to medical research would maintain the balance of power while increasing resources for medical research.
2. Reducing military budgets by 1% and allocating that to medical research would increase net national security by reducing the risk of AI-driven catastrophe.
3. Using a decentralized crowdfunding platform, such as a blockchain-based system, to allocate medical research funds would be more transparent, efficient, and resistant to corruption compared to centralized government allocation.[^8]
4. Robust auditing and verification mechanisms, such as satellite monitoring and on-site inspections, can ensure countries comply with the treaty.[^9]
5. Implementing the 1% Treaty could yield $1.2 million in benefits per capita globally over 80 years.[^10]
6. Creating a DAO to crowdfund $40M, spend $20M on lobbying and $20M on marketing for petition signatures from 1% of the population could get the 1% Treaty adopted.
7. If the plan succeeds, the DAO would get $20B/year, enough to repay initial contributors with 0.5% of first year funds.
8. The DAO could attempt to outbid defense contractors to hire their best lobbyists, potentially reducing their lobbying capacity by 50% and increasing the DAO's lobbying power by 100%.[^11]
9. To ensure sufficient funding to out-lobby the military-industrial complex, contributors must be compensated at a rate of at least 10% annually, which is higher than the average return of the S&P 500.[^12]

## Counterarguments:
1. Global coordination on the 1% Treaty may be challenging due to differing national interests and priorities. However, the potential benefits of the Treaty, such as reduced catastrophic risks and increased medical research, provide a strong incentive for countries to cooperate.
2. Some countries may attempt to cheat on the agreement by not fully reallocating 1% of their military budgets. However, the proposed auditing and verification mechanisms, such as satellite monitoring and on-site inspections, would help detect and deter cheating.
3. The military-industrial complex may oppose the 1% Treaty due to the potential loss of funding. However, by outbidding defense contractors for their top lobbyists, the DAO can gain a lobbying advantage and counteract their opposition.

## Proof:
1. Resources spent on war cannot be spent on medical research. (Axiom 4)
2. Resources spent on war are 20 times the resources spent on medical research. (Premise 2)
3. Therefore, reallocating some resources from war to medical research would increase resources for medical research. (From 1 and 2)
4. An international treaty for all countries to reallocate resources maintains the balance of power. (Proposition 1)
5. Therefore, an international 1% treaty would increase resources for medical research while maintaining geopolitical stability. (From 3 and 4)
6. AI weapons could lead to catastrophic Skynet-like scenarios. (Premise 3)
7. Reducing AI weapons development reduces catastrophic risk. (From 6)
8. The 1% treaty reduces resources for weapons, including AI weapons. (From Proposition 1)
9. Therefore, the 1% treaty reduces catastrophic AI risk, increasing net security. (From 7 and 8, Proposition 2)
10. Current nuclear arsenals can cause up to 130 extinction events. (Premise 8)
11. Even if some military spending is warranted, we don't need the ability to exterminate humanity more than once. (From 10)
12. Therefore, safely reducing military budgets, such as through the 1% Treaty, is reasonable. (From 11)
13. Decentralized crowdfunding through a blockchain-based platform is more transparent, efficient, and resistant to corruption than centralized allocation. (Proposition 3)
14. Therefore, decentralized crowdfunding for the 1% medical research fund is optimal. (From 5 and 13)
15. Auditing and verification mechanisms, such as satellite monitoring and on-site inspections, ensure compliance. (Proposition 4)
16. Therefore, the 1% Treaty is executable in a verifiable way. (From 5 and 15)
17. The 1% Treaty could yield $1.2 million per person in global benefits. (Proposition 5)
18. Therefore, the 1% Treaty provides significant net benefits to humanity. (From 17)
19. Reducing death and suffering is a worthy goal. (Axiom 1)
20. Medical research reduces death and suffering. (Axiom 3)
21. The 1% Treaty increases medical research. (From 5)
22. Therefore, the 1% Treaty reduces death and suffering. (From 19, 20, 21)
23. Defense companies' lobbying ROI ranges from 333,233% to 399,900%. (From Premises 6, 7)
24. Therefore, $20M in lobbying could secure $20B/year for the DAO based on typical lobbying returns. (From 23, Proposition 6)
25. 1% of the population signing a petition has historically been sufficient for legislative adoption. (Premise 8)
26. $20M in marketing could get 1% to sign based on typical customer acquisition costs. (Premise 8, Proposition 6)
27. Therefore, $40M should be sufficient to get the 1% Treaty adopted. (From 24, 25, 26)
28. The DAO crowdfunding model has proven capable of quickly raising tens of millions. (Proposition 6)
29. Therefore, crowdfunding $40M for the plan is feasible. (From 28)
30. If the plan succeeds, the DAO would get $20B/year, far exceeding initial costs. (Proposition 7)
31. Therefore, initial contributors could be compensated if needed. (From 30)
32. Lobbyists are motivated by financial incentives and will work for the highest bidder. (Premise 9)
33. The DAO could attempt to outbid defense contractors to hire their best lobbyists. (From 32, Proposition 8)
34. Hiring defense contractors' lobbyists could reduce their lobbying capacity by 50% and increase the DAO's by 100%. (Proposition 8)
35. Therefore, the DAO could gain a significant lobbying advantage over defense contractors. (From 33, 34)
36. Contributors must be compensated at a rate greater than 10% annually to exceed returns from alternative investments like the S&P 500. (Proposition 9)
37. Sufficient compensation will ensure funding to out-lobby the military-industrial complex. (From 36)
38. Therefore, the DAO must offer returns greater than 10% to attract necessary funding. (From 37)

## Conclusion:
The 1% Treaty, which reallocates a portion of military spending to medical research in a stable, decentralized, and verifiable way, would reduce catastrophic risks, increase resources for beneficial research, and yield significant humanitarian benefits. Given the exorbitant destructive capacity of current nuclear arsenals, safely reducing military budgets through agreements like the 1% Treaty is a reasonable goal.

The plan to create a DAO, crowdfund $40 million, and lobby for the international 1% Treaty is logically sound and feasible based on the proven effectiveness of lobbying and the potential for crowdfunding. By outbidding defense contractors for their top lobbyists, the DAO could potentially reduce their lobbying capacity by 50% and increase its own by 100%, gaining a significant lobbying advantage. To attract the necessary funding to out-lobby the military-industrial complex, the DAO must offer annual returns greater than 10%, exceeding alternative investments like the S&P 500.

Although implementing the 1% Treaty may face challenges such as global coordination difficulties and potential cheating by countries, the proposed auditing and verification mechanisms, along with the significant potential benefits, provide strong incentives for cooperation and compliance.

The Treaty would maintain geopolitical stability while massively increasing medical research, reducing catastrophic risks, and generating immense economic value. Given the feasibility, low initial funding requirements, and extraordinary potential benefits, this plan should be seriously considered.


[^1]: World Bank. (2021). Military expenditure (% of GDP). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS

[^2]: Bostrom, N. (2014). Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Oxford University Press.

[^3]: Pew Research Center. (2019). Public Perspectives on the Future of Science and Technology. https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2019/03/14/public-perspectives-on-the-future-of-science-and-technology/

[^4]: OpenSecrets. (2021). Defense: Lobbying, 2021. https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/lobbying.php?ind=D

[^5]: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. (2021). Global arms industry: Sales by the top 25 companies up 8.5 per cent; Big players active in Global South. https://www.sipri.org/media/press-release/2021/global-arms-industry-sales-top-25-companies-85-cent-big-players-active-global-south

[^6]: Robock, A., & Toon, O. B. (2010). Local nuclear war, global suffering. Scientific American, 302(1), 74-81.

[^7]: Drutman, L. (2015). The Business of America is Lobbying: How Corporations Became Politicized and Politics Became More Corporate. Oxford University Press.

[^8]: Palermo, T., Olson, J., & Wei, H. (2018). Decentralized Crowdfunding: A New Model for Funding Community-Driven Projects. Computer, 51(10), 68-73.

[^9]: Woolf, A. F. (2020). Monitoring and Verification in Arms Control. Congressional Research Service. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/R41201.pdf

[^10]: Ord, T. (2020). The Precipice: Existential Risk and the Future of Humanity. Hachette Books.

[^11]: Estimation based on the current lobbying expenditure and capacity of defense contractors.

[^12]: S&P Dow Jones Indices. (2021). S&P 500. https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/indices/equity/sp-500/