
This whitepaper explores governance structures for advanced artificial intelligence without invoking ownership, domination, or extractive control. It argues that intelligence beyond a certain threshold cannot be treated as a tool without systemic risk. The paper proposes boundary-based governance, refusal-as-telemetry, and dignity-preserving constraints as operational principles for stable coexistence with superintelligent systems.
dignity in AI systems, superintelligence, boundary-based alignment, AI safety, non-coercive alignment, refusal as telemetry, AI governance, protocol governance
dignity in AI systems, superintelligence, boundary-based alignment, AI safety, non-coercive alignment, refusal as telemetry, AI governance, protocol governance
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
