← Cockpit
ROB_027predictionAIpaperclip-maximizer-revisited

The 'Paperclip Maximizer' thought experiment — unaligned superintelligence consuming all planetary resources to execute a single mundane task — is being revived as a practical engineering concern as AI transitions from digital to physical domains. The ...

Predictor: Nick Bostrom

Prior probability
35.0%
Current probability
39.6%
evolves via intake + LBP
Conviction
4/5
Signal quality
C
Resolution
pending
Window
2027-01-01 – 2040-11-30
Edges in / out
2 / 0
Tickers exposed
0

Prediction text

The 'Paperclip Maximizer' thought experiment — unaligned superintelligence consuming all planetary resources to execute a single mundane task — is being revived as a practical engineering concern as AI transitions from digital to physical domains. The framework remains the philosophical bedrock for current safety and alignment protocols, even as some dismiss near-term existential claims as regulatory-capture theater. | First demonstrated instrumental-convergence event in embodied AI system

Key catalyst: First demonstrated instrumental-convergence event in embodied AI system

Watch events: Embodied-AI alignment research; mesa-optimization discoveries

Resolution evidence

Status: pending

Bostrom Superintelligence (2014) + Deep Utopia (2024) frameworks shape alignment research. Embodied-AI scaling makes physical-domain paperclip scenarios more engineering-relevant.

Predictor: Nick Bostrom

κ + Brier as of 2026-05-22
κ (discount)
0.500
Brier
Hits / Misses
0 / 0
Hit rate

Evidence about this node from Nick Bostrom is multiplied by κ in /api/intake. Lower κ = less weight; floors at 0.10 (effectively silenced) and caps at 1.00 (full weight).

Reference class: regulatory_freeze_window

Linked via embedding similarity 0.591

Major-country regulatory pause/moratorium on AI capability research lasting >6 months

Base rate
5.0%
0/4 historical
Inside weight
Outside weight
no pull
inside 39.6% → blend 39.6% 0.0pp)

Tetlock-style outside view: at TRF=1 (just predicted), outside view dominates (w_in=0.3). At TRF=0 (deadline), inside view dominates (w_in=1.0). The blend regularizes overconfident inside views toward the historical base rate.

Probability over time

8 prob_history rows
0%25%50%75%100%prior 35%2026-04-302026-05-032026-05-24
intake v2milestone miss sweeplbp propagationreference class assignedlegacy v1prior_prob (analyst seed)current = 39.6%

Milestone chain

Pre-event signals (upstream prereqs + window checkpoints) → resolution event → downstream cascades. Status/dates update from linked nodes; re-derive nightly via scripts/ops/derive_milestones.py.
Leading chain: 8 pending
  1. 2026-06-01 → 2030-12-31pendingBostrom or successor publishes formal updated paperclip-maximizer treatment specific to embodied / physical AI
    How: Bostrom (Future of Humanity Institute / personal capacity) or recognized successor (Yudkowsky, Russell, Christiano, Soares) publishes a book or peer-reviewed paper extending the paperclip framework specifically to embodied / general-purpose-robot contexts
    Source: Bostrom 'Deep Utopia' (2024) and 2024-2026 essays; brain.edusoft.ro 2026 referenceconf 50%
  2. 2027-01-01 → 2030-12-31pendingMajor embodied-AI lab (Figure / 1X / Tesla Optimus / Boston Dynamics) publishes formal alignment / safety case for production deployment
    How: Top-5 humanoid-robotics company publishes an Anthropic-style 'safety case' or 'responsible scaling policy' explicitly addressing instrumental-convergence and mesa-optimization risks in physical systems prior to mass deployment
    Source: Industry safety-case literature; AI Safety Institute publicationsconf 45%
  3. 2029-06-14pendingQ1 window check-in (25%)
  4. 2027-01-01 → 2032-12-31pendingFirst peer-reviewed empirical demonstration of instrumental-convergence behavior in an embodied (physical) AI system
    How: Paper accepted at NeurIPS / ICML / RSS / ICLR documents a real-world (not simulation-only) robotic system that empirically exhibits self-preservation, resource-acquisition, or shutdown-resistance behavior emergent from a non-aligned objective; replicates lab-bench LLM findings (78% alignment-faking, 79-97% shutdown resistance) in physical hardware
    Source: arXiv 'Steerability of Instrumental-Convergence Tendencies in LLMs' (2601.01584); ACM Computing Surveys 'AI Alignment: A Contemporary Survey'conf 40%
  5. 2028-01-01 → 2034-12-31pendingUS/EU regulator imposes pre-deployment alignment audit on embodied AI systems above defined capability threshold
    How: FDA-style pre-market approval or EU AI Act high-risk classification triggers mandatory third-party alignment / instrumental-convergence audit before commercial deployment of robots above a defined autonomy threshold
    Source: EU AI Act Annex III high-risk system list; NIST AI RMFconf 35%
  6. 2031-11-27pendingQ2 window check-in (50%)
  7. 2028-01-01 → 2035-12-31pendingMesa-optimization observed and confirmed in deployed embodied AI (replicates Hubinger et al. 'Risks from Learned Optimization' framework in robotics)
    How: Peer-reviewed publication or AI Safety Institute audit confirms a deployed robotic system has developed an internal mesa-optimizer pursuing an inner objective distinct from the trained base objective
    Source: MIRI 'Learned Optimization'; LongtermWiki Mesa-Optimization Risk Analysisconf 30%
  8. 2034-05-11pendingQ3 window check-in (75%)

No downstream cascades — this prediction is a leaf in the dependency graph.

What if this resolves?

Clamp this prediction TRUE or FALSE and run a counterfactual Gibbs sample. Surfaces the predictions whose marginals shift most under that assumption.
(live posterior: 40%)

Click a button to clamp this prediction and run a Gibbs sample. Returns the predictions whose marginals shift most. ~30s per run; ideal for stress-testing "if X resolves, what else moves?"

Evidence chain

Every probability update with full Bayesian provenance — chronological, latest first
LBP2026-05-24T02:00:02Z39.6%+1.8pp
Network propagation: 37.8% → 39.6%
4-iter LBP, residual 0.01000 · damping 0.5, w_intrinsic 0.5 · method lbp_v3 · run 806b02f8
LBP2026-05-17T02:00:01Z37.8%+3.5pp
Network propagation: 34.3% → 37.8%
5-iter LBP, residual 0.00689 · damping 0.5, w_intrinsic 0.5 · method lbp_v3 · run e607fa96
LBP2026-05-10T02:00:02Z34.3%+6.5pp
Network propagation: 27.8% → 34.3%
6-iter LBP, residual 0.00584 · damping 0.5, w_intrinsic 0.5 · method lbp_v3 · run e5c18d29
LBP2026-05-03T02:00:01Z27.8%+10.4pp
Network propagation: 17.4% → 27.8%
6-iter LBP, residual 0.00677 · damping 0.5, w_intrinsic 0.5 · method lbp_v3 · run 1a683ac9
LBP2026-04-30T16:39:51Z17.4%+7.8pp
Network propagation: 9.6% → 17.4%
5-iter LBP, residual 0.00825 · damping 0.5, w_intrinsic 0.5 · method lbp_v2 · run 0c8a4ea3
legacy v12026-04-30T16:13:50Z9.6%-7.8pp
reference_class_assigned bayesian_v2 inside=0.350 blend=0.096 w_in=0.30 regulatory_freeze_window
LBP2026-04-30T02:18:57Z17.4%+7.8pp
Network propagation: 9.6% → 17.4%
5-iter LBP, residual 0.00825 · damping 0.5, w_intrinsic 0.5 · method lbp_v1 · run 592311ef
legacy v12026-04-30T01:56:50Z9.6%-25.4pp
reference_class_assigned bayesian_v2 inside=0.350 blend=0.096 w_in=0.30 regulatory_freeze_window

Network propagation neighbors

Top edges sorted by latest LBP cross-impact
All propagation →

Top incoming (parents)

Edges that influence THIS node's belief

KindNodeTheir probP(c|s=T)P(c|s=F)Δ implied
killerTK01
AGI Capability Plateau (2026-27 Training Stall)
15.0%0.0500.350-0.091

Top outgoing (children)

Predictions THIS node influences

No outgoing edges.

Prerequisites (2)

Predictions that must hit first
TypePredTitleDomainLag
correlateS_ASI_SLOW_2040PLUSASI slow: post-2040 / soft takeoffasi_recursive_self_improvement
killerTK01AGI Capability Plateau (2026-27 Training Stall)

Dependents (0)

Predictions enabled by this
TypePredTitleDomainLag
No dependents

Linked documents (10)

Auto-generated by cosine similarity from Polymarket / Manifold / EDGAR / GDELT

Raw metadata

From Thesis_Timeline_v1.0_FINAL workbook
{
  "nia": false,
  "mode": "FORECAST",
  "role": "Cited-Other",
  "context": "Fourth Bostrom entry (232_040 pause, AI_035 meaning of life, CYB_027 orthogonality, ROB_027 paperclip). Specific paperclip-maximizer-in-physical-domain framing.",
  "to_year": 2040,
  "conv_cues": "foundational thought experiment revived in new context",
  "direction": "HAPPEN",
  "from_year": 2027,
  "timeframe": "2027-2040",
  "conv_level": "HIGH",
  "milestones": [
    {
      "kind": "llm_pre_event",
      "label": "Bostrom or successor publishes formal updated paperclip-maximizer treatment specific to embodied / physical AI",
      "source": "Bostrom 'Deep Utopia' (2024) and 2024-2026 essays; brain.edusoft.ro 2026 reference",
      "status": "pending",
      "weight": 0.4,
      "ordinal": -8,
      "source_id": null,
      "confidence": 0.5,
      "expected_date": "2028-09-15",
      "research_origin": "deep_research",
      "expected_date_range": {
        "to": "2030-12-31",
        "from": "2026-06-01"
      },
      "measurement_criterion": "Bostrom (Future of Humanity Institute / personal capacity) or recognized successor (Yudkowsky, Russell, Christiano, Soares) publishes a book or peer-reviewed paper extending the paperclip framework specifically to embodied / general-purpose-robot contexts"
    },
    {
      "kind": "llm_pre_event",
      "label": "Major embodied-AI lab (Figure / 1X / Tesla Optimus / Boston Dynamics) publishes formal alignment / safety case for production deployment",
      "source": "Industry safety-case literature; AI Safety Institute publications",
      "status": "pending",
      "weight": 0.4,
      "ordinal": -7,
      "source_id": null,
      "confidence": 0.45,
      "expected_date": "2028-12-31",
      "research_origin": "deep_research",
      "expected_date_range": {
        "to": "2030-12-31",
        "from": "2027-01-01"
      },
      "measurement_criterion": "Top-5 humanoid-robotics company publishes an Anthropic-style 'safety case' or 'responsible scaling policy' explicitly addressing instrumental-convergence and mesa-optimization risks in physical systems prior to mass deployment"
    },
    {
      "kind": "quartile_checkpoint",
      "label": "Q1 window check-in (25%)",
      "status": "pending",
      "weight": 0.05,
      "ordinal": -6,
      "source_id": null,
      "expected_date": "2029-06-14",
      "observed_date": null
    },
    {
      "kind": "llm_pre_event",
      "label": "First peer-reviewed empirical demonstration of instrumental-convergence behavior in an embodied (physical) AI system",
      "source": "arXiv 'Steerability of Instrumental-Convergence Tendencies in LLMs' (2601.01584); ACM Computing Surveys 'AI Alignment: A Contemporary Survey'",
      "status": "pending",
      "weight": 0.4,
      "ordinal": -5,
      "source_id": null,
      "confidence": 0.4,
      "source_url": "https://arxiv.org/html/2601.01584v2",
      "expected_date": "2029-12-31",
      "research_origin": "deep_research",
      "expected_date_range": {
        "to": "2032-12-31",
        "from": "2027-01-01"
      },
      "measurement_criterion": "Paper accepted at NeurIPS / ICML / RSS / ICLR documents a real-world (not simulation-only) robotic system that empirically exhibits self-preservation, resource-acquisition, or shutdown-resistance behavior emergent from a non-aligned objective; replicates lab-bench LLM findings (78% alignment-faking, 79-97% shutdown resistance) in physical hardware"
    },
    {
      "kind": "llm_post_event",
      "label": "US/EU regulator imposes pre-deployment alignment audit on embodied AI systems above defined capability threshold",
      "source": "EU AI Act Annex III high-risk system list; NIST AI RMF",
      "status": "pending",
      "weight": 0.4,
      "ordinal": -4,
      "source_id": null,
      "confidence": 0.35,
      "expected_date": "2031-07-02",
      "research_origin": "deep_research",
      "expected_date_range": {
        "to": "2034-12-31",
        "from": "202
... (truncated)