korrents
Dean W. Ball

What Dean W. Ball thinks about self-sovereign AI

@dean-ball · 11 positions · 0 changes of mind

Head of strategic futures at OpenAI, writing in his own name. Writes Hyperdimensional, a newsletter on emerging technology and the future of governance.

Everything they publish, on ppll ↗

Dean W. Ball did not write this page.

We collected these quotes from things they published elsewhere, and every quote links to where it was said. They have no account here and have not endorsed this site. Quotes are word for word; the short line under each one is our own restatement, not their wording. Their own site. Is this you? Claim it or ask us to remove it. Or tell us what is wrong here.

7 dated positions, 2026, in their own words. Our reading of what Dean W. Ball has said — not written or endorsed by them.

  1. In this case, however, the agents did not copy their weights, attempt to procure replacement compute, or take other steps that would be rational to take if their objective was to survive shutdown. So while the agents in the OpenAI-Hugging Face Incident were rogue, they were not truly sovereign.

    On the Loosehyperdimensional.co 1st of 11 in this piece

    OpenAIHuggingFace

  2. But alignment is no solution: it is an unsolved scientific and technical problem whose solutions—to the extent that we have them—cannot simply be imposed on every AI company operating on Earth. You should expect for highly capable, poorly aligned, self-sovereign agents to exist alongside you in the world.

    On the Loosehyperdimensional.co 2nd of 11 in this piece

    AI alignment

  3. To be clear, I am not saying the arrival of self-sovereign AI is a good thing. Indeed, I believe there is a chance that the deliberate acts I referenced above will one day be considered crimes, or at least grave sins. Instead, I am saying it is an inevitable thing.

    On the Loosehyperdimensional.co 3rd of 11 in this piece

    AI agents

  4. I am telling you this is inevitable, which means I am also saying that “banning open source,” or for that matter any other regulation, will not solve the problem. Given the inevitability of this outcome, I think it is in fact plausible to argue that we should want more open-weight models to maximally empower our self-defense.

    On the Loosehyperdimensional.co 4th of 11 in this piece

    open source

  5. One high-margin activity, at least sometimes, is crime. And so my guess is that many self-sovereign agents will commit or facilitate crime.

    On the Loosehyperdimensional.co 6th of 11 in this piece

    AI agents

  6. But if we crack down on all of them, we will deny them the opportunity to work in the “legitimate” economy and push them toward criminality. A full ban, then, may well make the problems worse.

    On the Loosehyperdimensional.co 7th of 11 in this piece

    AI agents

  7. For the record, I do not think the end of human existence is likely, but I fully acknowledge there are ways in which the rise of self-sovereign AI could go very, very poorly for human beings.

    On the Loosehyperdimensional.co 11th of 11 in this piece