Extinction Bounties

Policy-based deterrence for the 21st century.

Policy-research disclaimer

Extinction Bounties publishes theoretical economic and legal mechanisms intended to stimulate scholarly and public debate on catastrophic-risk governance. The site offers policy analysis and advocacy only in the sense of outlining possible legislative or contractual frameworks.

No legal or financial advice

Nothing here should be treated as a substitute for qualified legal counsel, financial due diligence, or regulatory guidance. Readers remain responsible for ensuring their actions comply with the laws and professional standards of their own jurisdictions.

Exploratory and personal views

All scenarios, numerical examples and opinions are research hypotheses presented by the author in a personal capacity. They do not represent the views of the author's employer, funding bodies, or any governmental authority.

Implementation caveats

Any real-world adoption of these ideas would require democratic deliberation, statutory authority, and robust safeguards against misuse. References to enforcement, penalties, or "bounties" are illustrative models, not instructions or invitations to engage in private policing or unlawful conduct. Nothing here is an accusation against, or a call to act against, any person or organisation; see non-targeting.

No warranty and limited liability

Content is provided "as is" without warranty of completeness or accuracy; the author disclaims liability for losses arising from reliance on this material.

By continuing beyond this notice you acknowledge that you have read, understood, and accepted these conditions.

About

10 September 2026 · last revised 20 October 2026

This site is unsigned, on purpose: the argument should stand or fall without a name attached to it.

Why this site exists

The core bet is that moving the Nash equilibrium away from working on frontier AI at all is easier than making AI safe. This site is the full version of that argument.

I am generally wary of putting political opinions under my own name. Public discourse has become hostile enough that frank argument needs some separation between the argument and the person making it, and a proposal to change the law should be judged on what it says, not on who says it.

I am not against AI

Despite everything on this site, I have no problem at all with working with existing models. I use them heavily in my own work and I am an enthusiastic proponent of them. They are the best productivity multiplier I have seen in my career.

My worry is about where the curve goes. Plot the value of AI against its capability and I think you get a volcano: the slope climbs steadily, each step more useful than the last, right up to a rim. Past the rim, the same step drops you into the crater, and what was a productivity multiplier becomes an existential threat. Nothing about the slope warns you where the rim is. Extinction bounties are aimed at the rim, not at the slope.

To cite this page: "About." Extinction Bounties, last revised 2026-10-20. https://extinction-bounties.com/meta/about/