Gaming (out) the system

Verification changes the stampede dynamics. I'm currently at FASR in the UK, it's an 8-week program dedicated to "compute verification". That's the not-quite-here-yet technology that would allow us to make agreements about how AI is being used, without leaking any closely-held secrets. You can think of it as "arms control for AI". Part of what I'm working on is the game theory of an agreement. This can get quite detailed (in terms of defining how often and how detailed an inspection should be) in order to make cooperation the best overall choice. But in this post I want to provide a high-level look at how verification would change the dynamics from "stampede" to "cooperate". Below I've got a map which allows us to use a player's value for Hazard (x-axis) and their value about how bad that incident might be (y-axis) as inputs, to see what their optimal strategy should be. Hazard here is the baseline chance that a project loses control of its ASI, even if they could take their time and think things through carefully. But, sadly, we don't live in a sane world. In our world, everyone is rushing to get ahead of everyone else [1] , which adds additional danger. Here I've set the baseline