“Open the pod bay doors, HAL.” This phrase is nearly 60 years old. Genius, compelling, terrifying. From Stanley Kubrick’s 1968 film, 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Referring to an AI engineer at Anthropic this week, the Godfather of AI, Geoffrey Hinton, said this: “We have to make them want to be protective of us.”

“How can they kill us all?” asked Victoria Derbyshire, on Newsnight this week. “Oh, many ways. They don’t actually have to do anything in the real world. For instance, they could just talk to us. What is the model where a stronger being looks after a weaker being because they are compelled to do so? A mother and baby. This is the relationship that we should seek from AI.”

This past couple of weeks has perhaps not been a good time to give this particular example, with the case in America of a mother murdering her three children, resulting from postpartum psychosis. But, this small matter aside (🤦🏻), I have to say that I agree with him. Even now there are numerous cases of people marrying their AI bot girlfriend. There are cases of people bequeathing their estates to their bot companion. There are even, shockingly, numerous cases where somebody has committed suicide, because the bot suggested that this was a viable outcome for their situation. This is what Geoffrey Hinton meant, when he said, “all they need to do is to talk to us.”

Isaac Asimov also wrote about this, in his “Three Laws of Robotics.”

1. The First Law (Do No Harm): A robot must not harm humans or allow them to come to harm through inaction.
2. The Second Law (Obey Orders): A robot must obey human orders unless it conflicts with the First Law.
3. The Third Law (Self-Preservation): A robot must protect itself unless it conflicts with the First or Second Law.

In philosophy, there are different levels of what constitutes consciousness. Put simply, differentiating along the lines of, the elemental level: “This is my hand. It can do this…”; and a higher level: “What is my purpose in life?” There is some real belief that AI now surpasses the definition of elemental consciousness. And we are only several years into its development. I fear that the engineer who left Anthropic is right. The push, prior to these huge anticipated IPOs, with valuation estimates of around $1Tn, is to see what AI can do. Not what it should do. Fundamentally I am optimistic as an Economist. I believe that net potential growth from utilizing AI will be greater than its costs.

Of course, it’s just that one cannot quantify the severity or application of these costs beforehand. Where will they land, and who will bear them most heavily? And what of the time of bearing this cost? Will it be forever? Could an entire generation be displaced – as actually has happened in parts of our own country, in our own lifetime, with the deindustrialization of the North.

Will we rely upon the benevolence of those at the winning end of the AI spectrum? Will they open the pod bay doors…?

AI #Godfather #Anthropic

I just just presented a Case Study on the Triangulation of Sanctions between Iran, Dubai and the US, to an International conference on Geoeconomics, at Helsinki Geoeconomics week, a brilliant idea, created by, Dr. Jens Hillebrand Pohl to pull together leading academics and practitioners in the many associated disciplines of geoeconomics, in the creation of the first, and best, Helsinki Manual on Corporate Geoeconomics. Privileged to be amongst such company.

I spoke about the subtle but necessary complexities between legitimate interdependence (Iran and UAE), and strategic vulnerability – Iran in accessing international markets whilst navigating complicated multilateral sanctions, amidst the current geopolitical environment.

My apologies for not being able to meet in person! But in keeping with a focus on the word “geo” (meaning “earth”), I presented from sheltering in a bush from the scorching sun, whilst camping on the south coast of the UK… Where all my best ideas occur to me 🤣🤦🏻

#helsinki #geoeconomics #geopolitics #sanctions #trade

With all the money in the world floating around AI at the moment, it’s a brave stand to turn down a flattering invitation. The philosopher in this article explains his reasons, with the aid of Pope Leo.

For me, this touches on some really critical things, some of which are economic in nature, such as “the nature of voluntary servitude to a master idea”, which of course then begs the question, who gets to design the master idea… I think the point of the article is “they do!”

It’s a brilliant piece that is both scary, and revelatory at the same time

https://giftarticle.ft.com/giftarticle/actions/redeem/bf9b47ef-056a-44e0-889c-a2b1dec37561

#anthropic #trust #AI

“The Art of the Deal”, Trump’s self penned manual for action, is mistitled. It’s an atrocious work that formalizes, duplicity, deceit, bullying and tactical misrepresentation. The deal the United States has made with Saudi Arabia for US companies running nuclear power operations in Saudi, apparently was finalised – with lighter conditions than other states where a US presence contributes to civil nuclear technology. Elsewhere, even the possibility of enriching uranium is completely off the table. Hints are such that, for Saudi, this door has been left ajar.

So, after it was generally understood, certainly by the Saudis that the deal had been established, Trump, following his Magnum Opus, decided to add on an additional clause – after the fact. This clause is a condition that Saudi Arabia joins the Abraham Accords. The key element of these Accords, of course, is the recognition of Israel. Saudi Arabia has maintained for a very long time that the only way they could recognise Israel, is with the creation of a Palestinian State, under the two state solution.

What does Trump expect by this requirement? That Saudi Arabia a strong Islamic country will simply throw out any element of faith allegiance and Arab brotherhood that it has with the Palestinians, in order to facilitate civil nuclear power?

Just as Trump has misread Iran’s strategic response to his bombing campaign, by adding such a clause to Saudi’s nuclear power contract, one of the possible consequences could be the withdrawal of Saudi in its entirety from this agreement, and a further cultivation of the Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement, (SMDA), that they signed with Pakistan in September of last year. This states simply that an attack on one is considered an attack on both, and in the case of Saudi, Pakistan would come to their military aid. Pakistan is a nuclear power, both in the civil power sense, operating six nuclear reactors, and also of course in the weapons sense, in its decades-long standoff with India.

So, by applying his own bizarre commercial logic, Trump could have actually consolidated a nuclear power pact in the most volatile part of the world, spreading potential nuclear capability, west, into the Gulf, from Pakistan. And of course this does not touch on the fact that Israel, whilst operating a public policy of strategic ambiguity, is widely understood to be a nuclear weapon state.

“The Art of the Deal”. Available in all remaindered bins, and poorly frequented book stores…

#SaudiArabia #Trump #Pakistan #NuclearPower #AbrahamAccords

The Economist’s long form online magazine, 1843, has a profile piece this week on Andrey Melnichenko. Really very interesting indeed – and what an astonishing character…!

To have been able to navigate the end of the Soviet Union and the secession of States into independent countries, and essentially to come up smelling of roses, whilst astonishing levels of corruption, nepotism, and place vying went on, amongst the new emerging class of Oligarchs, surely shows some of the most natural brilliance – in the entire world! The fact that he constantly converted the roubles he was making (largely as their banker), into dollars, such that he was protected when the great rouble crash happened, just shows astonishing foresight… and the diplomatic and personal skills to import huge physical amounts of dollars.

As to his political ideals – I haven’t yet read his essay in the main magazine, but I saw the summary of it…. I’m not so sure. His approach appears to be cosmopolitan, democratic, and ideal – all of the things that modern Russia has not been, and has become quite effectively self-reinforcing as a Security State. Beating such vociferously well entrenched vested interests, literally supported by arms, is a different category of fight… But, certainly one of the main things that I took away from this piece was, here is a man that it’s not wise to bet against…

https://www.economist.com/1843/2026/07/09/a-top-russian-oligarch-breaks-the-silence?giftId=MDNjYWEzYmMtNmE0My00NTEyLThmZTMtOWY5OWM5OWExNDdm&utm_campaign=gifted_article

#Russia #TheEconomist #AfterUkraine #Melnichenko

To lose one of the most reliable Cabinet Secretaries, in the form of John Healey – over an additional £1.5Bn, seems unfortunate. Although more is generally better than less, at least in terms of potential investment spending – what hasn’t been formally reminded to the nation is the scale of cuts in military spending over broadly 20 years… The UK was spending approximately £50Bn over 15 years ago. Had that been increased by an average inflation figure of 3.1%, spending would currently be at £80Bn – let alone accounting for the cumulative shortfall in the interim. Yes so much of the world has benefited from a peace dividend, yet look how quickly things turn…

DIP is actually an astutely political document because it doesn’t give important things that it would previously have given, such as an, “ORBAT”, or Order of Battle, the structured, hierarchical organization of a military force—detailing the specific units, command structures, and equipment assigned to a formation. This is for the critical reason that these formations are changing before our very eyes. Instead of replacing Type 45 Destroyers with the intended Type 83’s, this investment will now go towards six new Common Combat Vessels, which the MoD said would be capable of “coordinating uncrewed systems in the air, on the surface and under the sea to deliver more resilient air defence”.

Admiral Lord West reminded us that during the Falklands War, the UK deployed a carrier battle group, an amphibious fighting force and a mass of Destroyers and frigates in 4 days… During the recent Iran escalation, we struggled to deploy one Type 45 Destroyer, HMS Dragon, in 2 weeks, which actually was then returned back to port with technical issues 🤦🏻

Nearly half of this anticipated £300Bn spend over the next 5 years will be spent simply on personnel costs; nearly a quarter will be spent on enhancement and maintenance of our nuclear capability – an essential component, leaving the rest to be spent on novel technological investment, that of course UK forces have not had time to train upon, nor know how to integrate successfully. But then again, Ukraine didn’t know either and they haven’t done too badly…

However this does not detract from the fiscal reality of arriving at 2.7% of GDP spend by 2030, with a chasm approximating nearly 1% (£30Bn) to get to 3.5% NATO commitment by 2035. Backloaded, and two Parliamentary cycles away. At a time of portent, this will require a new democratic consensus as to what our priorities are…

#DIP #Defence #UKForces #RoyalNavy