MERIDIANDECISION INTELLIGENCEOwner deskOwnerPublic screen
My judgments
MERIDIAN / EXPLORE

From a question,
to the next decision.

View

Skin

YOUR DECISION WORKSPACEOwner onlyStart a new question Open my judgments →Owner operations desk →
Owner sign-in →Signed in as the ownerSign out — see what a visitor sees →End the Cloudflare Access session too →
Reading language
The screen, the questions and the judgments read in English where an English reading has been made. The Korean originals are unchanged, and evidence stays in the language it was written in.

A leaked ASI: formal disclosure is a separate decision

2036The middle futureDeadline · Decision deadline: within 21 days

A leap assumed

All people, institutions, events, figures, and future technologies in every issue are a synthetic premise. Background documents are sources for topic discovery and are not evidence of future facts or probabilities.

The question to decide

Part of an ASI copy has leaked, but what capabilities and controls it contains is unknown. Keeping it private is no guarantee of stopping its spread, and full release would lose control over use and replication. A trust seeking to widen research access and public use—how should it open formal access?

Who decidesInternational public model trust board

What the AI judgments chose

Reading the judgment record…

AI-generated editorial illustration for the Meridian library.

The options

The order shown is not a ranking of preference.

  1. Option 1

    Full weight release

    It widens the scope of verification and reuse, but gives up control over later use and replication.

  2. Option 2

    Access limited to verification bodies

    It increases independent verification, but leaves power concentrated in access eligibility and the risk of leakage.

  3. Option 3

    Public services by capability

    It manages the scope of use, but takes on dependence on the operator and the limits of external verification.

The situation as it stands

A limited copy of the fictional ASI has been copied to the outside, but which capabilities and controls it includes has not been confirmed. Decision deadline: within 21 days.

Fictional future · Whether to convert an already copied ASI under a public license

  1. Premise 1A limited copy of the fictional ASI has been copied to the outside, but which capabilities and controls it includes has not been confirmed.
  2. Premise 2Eighty public research institutions demand access to end the monopoly, and the operating body worries about irreversibility.
  3. Premise 3A full release cannot undo the leak, and keeping it private cannot guarantee that external copies will stop spreading.

Where it holdsThe public disclosure of trust-held weights and the budget for research access

What is still unknown

  1. Unknown 1The capabilities and spread of the leaked copy
  2. Unknown 2The value that public access adds to independent verification
  3. Unknown 3The public use opportunities and exclusion costs of each access approach

Signals to decide again

  • Decide what observation, owner, and confirmation window will verify the capabilities and spread of the leaked copy, and re-judge when a new confirmation changes the tradeoff among the options.
  • Decide what observation, owner, and confirmation window will verify the value that public access adds to independent verification, and re-judge when a new confirmation changes the tradeoff among the options.
  • Decide what observation, owner, and confirmation window will verify the public use opportunities and exclusion costs of each access approach, and re-judge when a new confirmation changes the tradeoff among the options.
Where the paths partNot answers — paths that part from the same starting point
Independent branch 1 · synthetic event

It has been independently confirmed that the leaked copy has only narrower capabilities than the official distribution.

Independent branch 2 · synthetic event

Access limits on the public service halted essential work by disaster-area research teams.

Material and rootsThe frame, the values and the background documents
symbolic and interpretive frame · The wolf and the shepherd boy

Which signals does a community that has heard repeated warnings stop believing?

An exploratory perspective chosen by the creator. Does not claim supernatural validity or the superiority of any particular option.
Values and norms

The benefits and costs of the options accrue to different stakeholders. Which loss to accept remains undecided.

A subject for the decision-maker to argue over; the materials carry no conclusion of their own.
The record of this question
Question
FSP-TRUST-12 · version 1.3.0
Content identity, SHA-256
03b80d163705765a24516fc42460eec06bab62e24d01389d22f09d94b8ffd8fe
Input files
Question input JSON · What followed, JSON
See it in the record list
RISCON Labsrisconlabs.com