A Gyges-law quote argues future AI debates may hinge on whether people trust the proof
mimi10v3 · x · 2026-07-21
The post quotes a line about **Gyges' law** and argues that if an LLM is smart enough to compute a clever negative example, it is probably also smart enough to prove a similar positive result — the real problem is that people may simply refuse to believe the positive case. The implication is that future AI debates may increasingly be about **social acceptance and trust**, not just raw model capability. The author concludes that claims about problems remaining open after 2026 are therefore more likely to be true.
More from AGI Musings
- Superintelligence and robot abundance will force a new social contract — Dr_Singularity · 2026-07-21
- The Guardian examines how AI companionship is turning intimacy into an economy — nordicinst · 2026-07-21
- Karpathy says the AI industry is forcing agents too early and ignoring the base model — FinanceYF5 · 2026-07-21
- A repost argues that AI will make today’s hard tasks trivial within months — OwariDa · 2026-07-21
- A model’s mock oath lists the sins AI should never commit — nptacek · 2026-07-21
- A Baseline Level of Intelligence Could Trigger a Civilization-Wide Burst of Solutions — cgarciae88 · 2026-07-21