Thanks, But Unresponsive to Issues Raised.
You seem to start with the assumption that emergence of AGI can be a controlled linear process as opposed to a nonlinear event (i.e., intelligence explosion). In fact, examples proffered exhibit confusion on this key distinction and consequence of getting it wrong. Also, seems you neglected points raised in my articles.
In effect, you seem to be “selling” your approach as “the” approach. While your approach has some merit, the “society-in-the-loop” approach seems far better, though questions as to nonlinearity can still be raised.
When you say,
“AGI approached this way may not even result in superintelligence; we might get half-way there and realize the danger with the help of our personal AGI better half. A few people (and/or their AGIs) might go rogue or become careless and initiate an explosion at any time, but at least a counterbalance could arise out of the widely distributed partial-AGI that is in the process of evolving. Thus the whole situation is more likely to remain under control,”
You sound naïve or cavalier or both. The issue is not “just” better defenses. So, while appreciate response, you actually increased concern.