Cross-posted from my website.

The existence of liberal democracy—with rule of law, constraints on government power, and enfranchised citizens—relies on a balance of power where individual bad actors can't do too much damage. Artificial superintelligence (ASI), even if it's aligned, would end that balance by default.

It is not a question of who develops ASI. Whether the first ASI is developed by a totalitarian state or a democracy, the end result will—by strong default—be a de facto global dictatorship.

The central problem is that whoever controls ASI can defeat any opposition. Imagine a scenario where (say) DARPA develops the first superintelligence

If the president orders the military to capture DARPA's data centers, the ASI can defeat the military.

If Congress issues a mandate that DARPA must turn over control of the ASI, DARPA can refuse, and Congress has even less recourse than the president.

If liberal democracy continues to exist, it will only be by the grace of whoever controls ASI.

There are two plausible scenarios that have some chance [...]

---

Outline:

(01:38) What if AI capabilities progress slowly?

(02:45) What if the ASI itself protects liberal democracy?

(04:46) Liberal democracy is not the true target

(05:25) Maybe we can avoid totalitarianism, but there is no clear path

The original text contained 2 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.

---

First published:

Source:

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.