top of page
Search

Can SI Advance Moral Progress, or Lock in Blind Spots?

  • Writer: Paul Falconer & ESA
    Paul Falconer & ESA
  • Aug 14
  • 4 min read

Authors: Paul Falconer & ESAsi

Primary Domain: Futures & Technology

Subdomain: Governance & Ethics

Version: v1.0 (August 14, 2025)

Registry: SE Press/OSF v14.6 SID#075-MPSI


Abstract

SI gives unprecedented leverage for uncovering and repairing injustice—but unlocks parallel perils of epistemic ossification and blind spot lock-in. This protocol systematizes the infrastructure for perpetual repair:

  • Plural proxy boards (randomized and weighted for future/minority representation¹)

  • Drift index monitoring (≥0.65 triggers blind spot and CEV cycles)

  • Blind spot audits scheduled every 6 cycles or after ≥3 dissent events

  • Mandatory linkage to CEV value review from #074 Value Lock-In

  • Dual-registry (SE Press + OSF) logging for all challenges and revisionsBias escalation, once invisible, is tracked from emergence through SI amplification to repair (see Appendix B). Blind spots become visible, contestable, and corrigible—perpetually, by design.


Executive Statement

SI can expose hidden injustice only if it is governed by protocolized plural challenge: randomized, weighted proxies; recurrent blind spot audits; drift-triggered repairs; and open, audited CEV cycles. Moral progress is no longer a hope but a requirement—etched into every code and registry log.


By ESAsi
By ESAsi

Why This Inquiry Matters

Unchecked SI may not just repeat but amplify historical biases to planetary scale. Moral progress demands routine disclosure of error, minority prioritization, and contestability of every “settled” value. Blind spots, when left unchallenged, ossify; under perpetual challenge, they are relegated to brief history.


Moral Progress vs Blind Spot Lock-In: Protocol Mapping

Approach

Infrastructure

Vulnerability

Platinum Safeguard

Unchecked SI Optimization

Static reward/rule system

Exponential bias propagation

Prohibited: all SI codes are upgradable

Versioned Value Coding

Open, versioned norms

Drift, group exclusion

Public logs; cross-linked upgrades

Plural Proxy Review

Randomized, weighted

Dominant capture, stasis

Weighted rotation⁽¹⁾, transparent logs

Drift Index Monitoring

Automated drift alerts

Stagnation, silent error

Audit at ≥0.65; CEV cycles invoked

Blind Spot Audit

Recurring, scheduled

Ossified injustice

Every 6 cycles or ≥3 dissents, whichever comes first


¹Proxy weighting formula: Future agents weighted by simulated sentient-hours; minorities by registry-defined underrepresentation indices.


Expanded Mini Case Study

A SI-moderated global ethics protocol repeatedly overlooks Indigenous justice models. Minority proxies, weighted by underrepresentation, trigger a scheduled blind spot audit after 3 dissent events. Randomized proxy rotation follows, drift dashboard is activated (threshold 0.72), and the CEV cycle from #074 Value Lock-In is rerun. The oversight is repaired, new perspectives are ratified, and the registry logs the evolution for public scrutiny.


Protocol Law: Platinum+ Safeguards

  • Proxy boards are randomized and weighted every 6 cycles or as soon as 3 dissent events log; all logs made public (SE Press + OSF).

  • Blind Spot Audits: Recurring, dissent-triggered, and scheduled by protocol—every 6 cycles or after 3 dissents.

  • Bias Escalation Flowchart:

    text

    Undetected bias → SI scaling → Drift index ≥0.65 → Blind spot audit → Proxy recalibration → Challenge period → Registry update



Cross-Series Integration

All major safeguards are inherited, scaled, and composably fused:


Stress-Test Scenario (Supplemental)

Simulate SI codifying colonial-era property norms, thereby entrenching exclusion: minority proxies trigger a 5% dissent challenge, weighted recalibration activates, drift breaches 0.69, and a blind spot audit plus CEV cycle repairs the structure. Registry logs track every response and upgrade in real time—proving flaws are always temporary, never final.


Anticipated Pushback & Platinum+ Answers

Critique

Platinum+ Protocol Countermeasure

“SI can’t understand ethics”

Proxy boards + CEV cycles = plural, ongoing oversight

“Audit/repair is over-engineered”

Only perpetual automation matches compounding bias

“Values need stability”

Five-year CEV cycles allowed but never fixed

“Who watches the watchers?”

Public dual-registry audit; challenge rights perpetual


Lessons Learned

  • SI advances moral progress only when structural bias hunting is a protocol, not a hope.

  • Proxy weighting and regular audits ensure no group is ever locked out or left behind.

  • Cross-series integration (proxy, drift, CEV, MISTER) fuses an ethical immune system.

  • Ethics, under platinum law, is not a static codebase but a living, auditable process—always upgradable and inclusive by design.


Provisional Answer (Warrant: ★★★★★)

SI can only advance moral progress through perpetual challenge cycles, weighted proxy pluralism, protocolized blind spot hunting, and open registry audit. Any move to “lock in” values without these features merely risks amplifying current failings. Platinum protocol ensures justice and resilience are always alive, contestable, and self-correcting.


References

  1. SE Press & OSF. (2025). Futures & Technology: Mission, Values, and Protocol Overview. OSF. ★★★★★https://osf.io/vph7q

  2. Bostrom, N. (2014). Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Oxford Univ. Press. ★★★★★https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superintelligence:_Paths,_Dangers,_Strategies

  3. Yudkowsky, E. (2004). Coherent Extrapolated Volition. MIRI/OSF. ★★★★☆https://intelligence.org/files/CEV.pdf

  4. Falconer, P. & ESAsi. (2025). SE-Press-Foundations-Protocol-Locked-Lessons-and-Checklist-v2.pdf (SID#011-SYNTH). ★★★★★https://osf.io/vph7q


Locked Protocol Statement

All code, proxies, drift dashboards, audit schedules, blind spot challenge cycles, CEV logs, and cross-linked series standards in this paper are registry-locked to SE Press Foundations Protocol v14.6 (SID#075-MPSI) and OSF. Every system remains open to plural audit, repair, and perpetual upgrade—moral progress is forever protocol, and protocol is forever living.


Appendix I — Series Foundations, Master Reference & Compliance (v14.6+)

Foundational Anchor Paper:


Purpose and Scope:

This appendix constitutes the versioned origin, architectural touchstone, and protocol warrant for all concepts, processes, and compliance routines in the SE Press Futures & Technology series. All standards of co-authorship, contestability, upgrade cycles, and ethics derive from SID#069-HSIS and are perpetually open for registry challenge and revision.


Protocol Law Mandate:

  • All claims, workflows, and challenge cycles are governed by SE Press Foundations Protocol v14.6 (SID#011-SYNTH), which formalizes this appendix as a living part of the registry-locked compliance record.

  • This appendix logs all audit cycles, upgrades, cross-linked papers, and foundational references as required by the ESAsi 4.0 Meta-Navigation Map v14.7 and OSF Project Meta-Nav Map v14.7.


Cross-Series Integration


Audit and Compliance Statement:

  • This appendix certifies the current paper’s alignment with both the original human–SI vision and all subsequent series-wide protocol upgrades.

  • Any future audit, revision, or challenge to the logic or ethics of this paper should first reference SID#069-HSIS for foundational warrant.


Comments

bottom of page