In previous posts in this sequence, I laid out a case for why most AI governance research is too academic and too abstract to have much influence over the future. Politics is noisy and contested, so we can’t expect that good AI governance ideas will spread on their own – we need a large team of people who are actively promoting those ideas. Unfortunately, we currently have at least 3 researchers for every advocate, so many policy ideas have been “orphaned,” i.e., nobody is taking those ideas and showing them to decision-makers who have the power to implement them.

The best way of addressing this imbalance would be to shift funding and jobs from research to advocacy. However, as a practical matter, I don’t expect many funders to heed my arguments, nor do I expect many researchers to spontaneously quit and look for new jobs in other fields. So [...]

---

Outline:

(01:49) DRAFT ACTUAL POLICY DOCUMENTS

(04:43) MAKE YOUR WHITE PAPERS SPECIFIC

(08:31) CATALOG OF ORPHANED POLICIES

(08:57) Windfall Profits Clause

(09:48) Antitrust Waiver

(11:18) Strict Liability

(12:28) Visa Reform

(14:01) Insurance Requirements

(15:24) Public Grant Funding

(16:18) Global Crisis Hotline

(17:51) Compute Monitoring

(19:41) LAWS Boycott

(22:10) Industry Standards

(23:18) Structured Access to Research

(24:39) CONCLUSION

---

First published:
May 29th, 2025

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/wFKZmvfRfNn24HNHp/orphaned-policies-post-5-of-6-on-ai-governance

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

“Orphaned Policies (Post 5 of 6 on AI Governance)” by Mass_Driver

LessWrong (30+ Karma)