Blockchain Papers

Jun-Won Lee

No abstract is available for this record.

Igor Calzada

Abstract This article critically examines how Web3 decentralization policy trends impact global digital governance, questioning whether they genuinely distribute power or merely shift influence to a new, tech-savvy elite. Based on fieldwork in Silicon Valley since August 2022 and engagement with scholars and practitioners up to December 2025, the article provides a conceptual analysis with emerging empirical insights around the nascent global Web3 movement. While Web3 advocates challenge centralized data monopolies and traditional state structures, this analysis critiques the assumption that Web3 democratizes power, highlighting both its potential for inclusion and risks of exclusion, insofar as it may reinforce hierarchies rooted in technical expertise and digital access. While acknowledging the broader landscape of Web3 governance (including hybrid and federated models) and scoping the Global North and Global South contexts considering global adoption cases, the article particularly focuses on three post-Westphalian paradigms: (i) Network States, (ii) Network Sovereignties, and (iii) Algorithmic Nations. While Network States advocate for crypto-libertarian governance, Network Sovereignties and Algorithmic Nations emphasize cooperative governance aimed at empowering minority communities, such as indigenous groups, stateless nations, and e-diasporas, through decentralized, data-driven systems. By engaging with both the limitations and some promises, prospects, and pitfalls of Web3, this article questions whether Web3 can create a more inclusive global order or if influence is increasingly concentrated among a new elite. This article contributes to debates on sovereignty, governance, and citizenship by advocating hybrid policy frameworks that balance global and local dynamics, emphasizing solidarity, digital justice, and international cooperation for equitable Web3 governance.

Vadim Tsyvian

Digital systems face not a security failure but an ontological one. Authority on the internet is implemented as code, and code is inherently simulable, reproducible, and scalable. As artificial intelligence exposes this flaw at scale, efforts to secure digital authority through identity, credentials, and probabilistic verification prove structurally insufficient. This paper argues that authority cannot ontologically originate from code, and that all code-based authority systems are therefore structurally vulnerable, regardless of implementation quality. We outline the historical origins of the error, explain why vulnerability is unavoidable in code-based authority systems, and propose a return to presence as the only non-simulable foundation for digital authority—implemented through local cryptographic proof generation that preserves privacy by architectural design. The core claim is simple: code cannot be authority. Authority must arise from being. This is not a technological decision, but an ontological one—and ontological mistakes cannot be patched. Keywords: ontological cryptography, HISPU, digital trust, code-based authority, human presence verification, cryptographic attestation, privacy-preserving architecture, cybersecurity, authentication, biometric entropy, local processing, zero-knowledge presence, environmental embedding, physical unclonability, quantum-resistant, AI safety, digital sovereignty, proof of being, presence-based authority

Guček, Tjaša

No abstract is available for this record.

J.P. Vergne

Abstract This essay argues that social media document (rather than fuel) the decline of political democracy while helping revive organizational democracy, including through ‘decentralized autonomous organizations’ (DAOs). Yet, despite giving everyone a voice and the ability to organize across borders, social media could over‐concentrate power if, in the future, a few large but siloed platforms ended up shrinking viewpoint diversity – the oxygen of democracy. How can we curb corporate platform concentration without dulling democracy? Due to trade‐offs in platform design, no single service can deliver free speech, free usage, and safe usage simultaneously. Fortunately, this ‘trilemma’ can be transcended at the industry level with an interoperability mandate that fosters user multihoming and lets various platforms provide different bundles of democratic benefits. Email works across service providers, and so can social media. Interoperability thus represents a viable answer based on six advantages: practical feasibility; competition on merit; faster complementor innovation; jurisdictional flexibility; unlocking network effects between, rather than just within platforms; and alignment with democratic values. Platform interoperability can make social media social again and future‐proof democracy. This proposal is a clarion call for blaming the Internet a little less for democracy’s problems and instead leveraging its infrastructure strategically to address them.

Chris Muellerleile

During the first decade of cryptocurrencies (2008–2017) there were few connections established between crypto and the conventional finance sector, but in the US in 2025 the integration of these two sectors is proceeding at speed. This paper examines one part of this integration – the centralisation of cryptocurrency trading inside of large, digital platformed exchanges, which is theorised as a shift from cryptocurrency to cryptofinance. Furthermore, the paper shows how this shift to cryptofinance has been aided by an emergent crypto-state nexus. The novel contribution of the paper is explaining how the US crypto markets have progressed from niche, relatively decentralised and blockchain-based, with little association with or regulation by nation-states, into what is now competition between FinTech-fuelled, digital platform firms that provide suites of financial services and instruments and collect fees for mediating access to the underlying blockchain markets. Empirically, the paper traces the rise of Sam Bankman-Fried’s firm, FTX, as it evolved from a small, California-based start-up running arbitrage trades in 2017 into one of the world’s largest crypto exchanges servicing over a million customers in 2022. In light of the FTX story, the paper analyses the geographical political economy of platformed cryptofinance as it struggles with both the incumbent financial sector and the US state.

Calzada, Igor

This research examines how emerging forms of digital sovereignty, decentralized infrastructures, and anticipatory AI governance are reshaping nationhood in the algorithmic age. Drawing on the conceptual framework of Algorithmic Nations (Calzada 2018) and incorporating new empirical insights from embedded action research (2022–2025), the study analyses the Basque Country as a paradigmatic case of a “small stateless nation” navigating the global reconfiguration of power between states, corporations, and communities. The presentation synthesizes three competing post-Westphalian paradigms—Network States (Srinivasan 2022), Network Sovereignties (De Filippi 2024), and Algorithmic Nations (Calzada 2018)—as shown in the comparative table on page 19, highlighting their differing assumptions regarding governance, identity, participation, and technological control. Building on the diagnostic indicators of Europe’s digital dependence (page 10) and the transition from Gaia-X to EuroStack (page 11), the study evaluates the strategic implications of digital public infrastructures, data cooperatives, federated architectures, and Web3 ecosystems for stateless nations. Through comparative analysis of the Global North (e.g., Scotland, Quebec, Flanders), the Global South (e.g., Kurdistan, Sámi, Tamil, Amazigh), and the Basque Country (pages 16–17), the work demonstrates how communities with diverse geopolitical constraints can articulate forms of AI sovereignty grounded in rights-based, culturally rooted, and community-driven governance. The Basque case illustrates how fragmented digital systems (.eus, EJIE/Izenpe, Osakidetza, MUBIL, etc.) can evolve toward an interoperable, multi-scalar technopolitical architecture, aligning linguistic, territorial, and infrastructural dimensions. The analysis argues that AI-driven infrastructures, data governance, and decentralized architectures are not merely technical layers but emerging geopolitical terrains where stateless, indigenous, diasporic, and minority nations can renegotiate autonomy. The concept of Algorithmic Nations provides a framework for understanding how community sovereignty can be built through data commons, federated systems, and anticipatory governance, particularly in multilingual and culturally distinct territories such as the Basque Country. Overall, the study contributes to debates on global digital governance, digital sovereignty, and the future of nationhood by proposing that algorithmic infrastructures are becoming central to political organization. It calls for democratic, inclusive, and community-oriented models of AI governance capable of avoiding techno-authoritarianism, Big Tech dependency, and “sovereignty washing,” while enabling emancipatory, culturally anchored, and future-oriented forms of collective self-determination.

Akinlemi Olushola, S. P. Meenakshi

Cryptocurrency exchanges are integral to the digital asset economy; however, their rapid growth has been accompanied by recurrent high-impact cyberattacks that erode trust and inflict substantial losses. Guided by the PRISMA-ScR framework, this review systematically screened peer-reviewed and industry sources to construct a validated dataset of 220 major incidents (2009–2024) across centralized (CEX) and decentralized (DEX) exchanges. We classify attack vectors, analyze repeated high-impact patterns, and identify systemic vulnerabilities spanning cryptographic mechanisms and exchange infrastructure. Across CEX platforms, four of ten identified attack types accounted for 62 of the 80 incidents and approximately $1.764 billion in losses (42.1% of the $4.191 billion CEX total). Across DEX platforms, five of eighteen attack types were responsible for 120 of 140 incidents, totaling $3.755 billion (87.3% of the $4.303 billion DEX total). The overall losses sum to $8.494 billion across 220 incidents (80 CEX; 140 DEX). Repeated vectors comprised 182/220 incidents and $5.519 billion (65.0%) of losses, dominated by wallet/key compromise (78 incidents; $2.394 billion) and DEX system/server/protocol exploits (56 incidents; $1.939 billion); these two classes account for 134/182 repeated incidents (79.1%) and $4.333 billion (78.5%) of repeated losses. We examine the susceptibility of cryptographic defenses to emerging quantum adversaries and assess the exchange readiness for post-quantum threats. This study is the first to systematically compile and quantitatively analyze cybercrime incidents affecting both centralized and decentralized cryptocurrency exchanges in a unified dataset, enabling unprecedented comparability of systemic risks with actionable insights for cybersecurity researchers, regulators, and exchange operators seeking quantum-safe infrastructure evolution.

Yaohui Wang, Yang Qiu

How do the emerging Web 3.0 technologies affect the survival of non-state armed groups (NSAGs) in their violent struggles vis-à-vis state entities? While techno-optimists argue that Web 3.0 can democratize the internet and curb monopolistic practices, its decentralized features, such as enhanced privacy, data ownership, and personalization, also present significant security challenges. These technologies can be weaponized by NSAGs to promote their efficiency and resilience. Borrowing insights from social movement theory, we construct a theoretical framework to explain how Web 3.0 applications affect the dynamics of NSAGs by impacting their organizational modes and strategies. It is argued that blockchain-based platforms, metaverse projects, and other Web 3.0 technologies promote the efficiency of the recruitment, training, financing, purchasing, and communication processes of NSAGs, increasing their capacities as social organizations, and thereby render these groups more resilient to collapse. We illustrate and corroborate our theoretical claims by examining the cases of how NSAGs such as the Islamic State utilize decentralized crypto exchanges and the Dark Web in their operations.

Zeyu Hu, Chang Zhang, D. J. Galligan

This thematic issue examines how artificial intelligence, metaverse imaginaries, and decentralized Web3 systems have become arenas for states to build infrastructures, set technical standards, and project geopolitical power. It reconceptualizes technology not merely as an object of regulation but as a medium of statecraft through which sovereignty, security, and leadership are contested and remade in a multipolar digital order. This issue analyzes three interconnected dimensions: (a) the impact of global AI competition on state-making processes, enhancing coercive, extractive, delivery, and informational capacities similar to earlier state formation phases; (b) the nature of technological leadership as a relational and dynamic process influenced by interactions between leading and following states; and (c) the role of security logics in transforming external rivalry and internal governance through securitization. Through comparative analysis of the US, China, the EU, and emerging economies, this issue explores how diverse political systems encode openness, sovereignty, and accountability into their technological regimes, demonstrating that technological governance is inseparable from state-making. The contributions map competing logics—sovereign, liberal, entrepreneurial—showing that digital governance emerges not as convergence toward a singular model but as recursive entanglements of imagination and infrastructure.

Ejiro U, Osiobe, Waleed A., Hammood, Safia, Malallah, Nyore E., Osiobe · 6 authors

Quantum mechanics principles underpin quantum computing, signaling a major shift in how we process information. While it offers immense processing power and potential advantages, it also presents significant challenges for the cryptocurrency industry. This sector has grown rapidly, supporting decentralized finance and empowering users worldwide, but it also attracts malicious actors looking to exploit its vulnerabilities. Traditional cryptography remains strong, yet increasingly sophisticated computational attacks threaten security. As the cryptocurrency market expands, quantum computing offers both opportunities, such as improved transaction security, and risks, like easier decryption for hackers. Understanding quantum technology’s benefits and challenges is crucial as it develops. Currently, data is protected by traditional cryptography, but future, more powerful quantum computers could weaken this security. This article explores potential uses of quantum computing in daily life and business, explains its functions simply, and discusses societal impacts. Its goal is to help students and general readers understand how quantum technology might transform our world through clear language and real-life examples. Topics include the basics of quantum computing, its present and future applications across industries, and its societal effects. We provide a thorough analysis of how quantum computing could reshape society through mathematical insights, practical examples, and future perspectives.

Goukassian, Lev

A systemic "evidentiary deficit" now characterizes automated global civicsystems, undermining regulatory oversight, institutional accountability, and public trust in high-stakes domains. The increasing opacity of high-speed, algorithmically-driven decisions in finance, public health, and environmental governance creates un-auditable risks. This report posits Ternary Logic (TL) as a neutral, non-ideological infrastructure framework designed to remediate this deficit. TL extends traditional binary logic by introducing a formal, third logical state: 0 (Epistemic Hold), distinct from 1 (Proceed) and -1 (Halt). This 0 state functions as a mandatory, auditable "computational hesitation" triggered by predefined uncertainty or risk thresholds. By instrumenting this pause, TL transforms deliberation and uncertainty from an operational failure into a cryptographically verifiable evidentiary asset. This report details the TL architecture through its Eight Pillars, which provide an integrated "accountability stack" mapping institutional policy to cryptographic proof. It describes the tri-cameral governance model—Technical Council, Stewardship Custodians, and Smart Contract Safeguard—architected for long-term resilience and prevention of institutional capture. Furthermore, it details the technical architecture, including a dual-lane, low-latency (<300ms) design, a hybrid-shield (public/private) ledger system, and a novel cryptographic stack (combining Ephemeral Key Rotation, Zero-Knowledge Proofs, and Cryptographic Erasure) that simultaneously satisfies regulatory demands for auditability, legal requirements for privacy (e.g., GDPR), and commercial protection of trade secrets. This framework provides a sovereign-grade blueprint for establishing provable accountability in systems governed by institutions such as the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and World Health Organization (WHO).

Marilyne Ordekian, Ingolf Becker, Tyler Moore, Marie Vasek

Centralized cryptocurrency exchanges have quickly become internal components of the digital finance ecosystem, mirroring traditional institutions by offering custody, investments, and transactional services. Despite their increasing prominence, the regulatory oversight has historically been fragmented and inadequate, leaving them largely relying on self-regulation. The resulting environment has been marked by exchange collapses, connections to criminal activities, cyber attacks, and poor operational security. High-profile failures, such as Mt. Gox and FTX, highlight the systemic risks and failure of internal governance models to properly mitigate or protect user funds from cascading risks or security breaches. In response, the European Union introduced the Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation and the Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA), intending to standardize regulatory oversight and enhance user protection. This paper presents the first comprehensive interdisciplinary analysis of centralized exchanges under the MiCA and DORA frameworks. Drawing on methods from both law and computer science, we systematically translate regulatory requirements into measurable compliance standards, and develop a novel doctrinal and empirical methodology to evaluate current self-regulatory practices of 75 centralized exchanges operating in Europe. Through a detailed analysis of 143 exchange legal documents, we identify major compliance gaps and regulatory uncertainties. Our findings indicate significant shortcomings in exchange practices relating to asset custody, cybersecurity, and liability. This suggests that serious efforts are needed to change these practices and ensure their alignment with regulatory requirements. Our framework enables a systemic comparison between regulation and practice, and establishes a baseline for evaluating the effectiveness of regulatory measures. This approach can be replicated to study other self-regulating emerging sectors. • We conduct a doctrinal analysis on recent EU regulations, the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) and Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA). We identify requirements for centralized cryptocurrency exchanges and systematically extract them and create a standard framework comprising 53 criteria. • We conduct the first comprehensive empirical study of self-regulation practices among all 75 fiat-dealing exchanges in Europe, analyzing 143 documents, including terms and conditions (T&Cs) and security policies. We compile a dataset of 371 hand-coded variables across 14 themes describing exchange practices. • We use the extracted legal standards to evaluate exchange practices, assessing their compliance posture with recent regulations. This study provides a baseline to gauge the effectiveness of MiCA/DORA in the long term and track changes compared to the pre-regulation era. Additionally, it provides a tool to understand the areas currently lacking or that need more attention in industry practices. • We show that many exchanges face challenges in effectively self-regulating, fulfill their custodial duties, maintaining robust security measures, and (may) use T&Cs to shift liability. By documenting these practices and shortcomings, we provide regulators and the industry actionable and tailored recommendations for improvements. We also provide a replicable methodology to investigate the self-regulation and governance of service providers in other emerging self-regulating technologies. • An earlier draft of this research was communicated with the EU’s European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) and European Banking Authority (EBA) in a closed meeting. We were recommended to expand the scope of the study to include DORA provisions in addition to MiCa. It was also suggested that this study could act as the ground truth baseline for pre-MiCA industry practices. A final version has been requested by said authorities. Additionally, findings from this paper have been submitted as evidence for consultation calls in the, UK. For intance, the FCA and HM Treasury. One of the authors recently presented the high-level implications of this study in an invited and closed conference organized by the FCA.

Saenko, Elena

Dissertation presented as the partial requirement for obtaining a Master's degree in Information Management, specialization in Digital Transformation

P. S. Joshi

In the current digital landscape, the demand for robust and layered security frameworks has intensified due to the increasing frequency and complexity of cyber threats. Cryptography and cybersecurity, though different in focus, are closely aligned and collectively form the core of modern digital defense strategies. Cryptography provides essential tools—such as encryption, hashing, and digital signatures—that safeguard the confidentiality, integrity, and authenticity of information. Cybersecurity builds on these techniques to implement policies and systems that protect against unauthorized access, data breaches, and malicious attacks. This paper examines the evolving connection between cryptography and cybersecurity, focusing on the development of cryptographic methods and their application in securing digital protocols like SSL/TLS, blockchain technologies, and public key infrastructures. Real-world use cases from healthcare, finance, and government are explored, highlighting the role of cryptographic integration in meeting regulatory standards like GDPR, HIPAA, and FISMA. The study also explores current challenges such as key management, scalability, and the threat posed by quantum computing. It further reviews emerging technologies including post-quantum cryptography, zero-knowledge proofs, and the integration of AI and machine learning for proactive, intelligent cybersecurity solutions.

PAPAGEORGIOU, Orestis

The rapid advancement and adoption of blockchain technology have fundamentally transformed various aspects of digital interaction, leading to the emergence of novel governance frameworks that challenge traditional centralized models. At the forefront of this transformation are decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) and an array of other governance structures applied in both permissionless and permissioned blockchain environments. Unlike conventional organizations that rely on hierarchical authority, DAOs within permissionless systems strive to operate through decentralized networks where decision-making power is distributed among all members, facilitated by smart contracts and governance tokens. In parallel, permissioned blockchain applications, often employed by consortia or enterprises, experiment with more structured membership and delegated authority, blending decentralized principles with selective participation to maintain compliance, accountability, and operational efficiency. These governance mechanisms, whether in DAOs or permissioned networks, are envisioned to enhance transparency, inclusivity, and autonomy. Yet, despite their idealistic promises, practical implementations have revealed significant challenges. Within DAOs, governance tokens intended to promote equitable decision-making often lead to power concentration and stakeholder inequality. Moreover, vulnerabilities in smart contract design and the absence of robust accountability frameworks have produced notable failures. In permissioned contexts, while governance structures can mitigate some of these issues through established roles and clearer recourse mechanisms, complexities arise in balancing decentralized ideals with enterprise-grade stability and oversight. This thesis critically examines the foundational principles of blockchain-based governance—spanning from permissionless DAOs to permissioned consortia— alongside their operational realities and limitations. It explores the effectiveness of governance tokens and the vulnerabilities undermining participatory ideals. It further examines whether emerging innovations, such as quadratic voting, market-based, and NFT-based voting mechanisms, mitigate any of the identified issues.

Kristen W. Carlson

Highlights of the IssueKris Carlson, Publisher and Editor-in-ChiefOur second issue surveys state of the art of large language models (LLMs) with an emphasis on safety and value alignment. Superintelligence StrategyDan Hendrycks, Eric Schmidt, Alexandr WangSeeking Stability in the Competition for AI Advantage: Commentary on Superintelligence StrategyIskander Rehman, Karl P. Mueller, Michael J. Mazarr (RAND Corp.) I recommend the RAND Corp critique by knowledgeable military policy analysts over the Hendrycks et al. article. The RAND article is illuminative, incisive, covers Superintelligence Strategy’s key points, and suggests critical reasoning flaws in their mutually-assured-AI-malfunction (MAIM} policy. Although it is valuable to compare the nuclear and AI revolutions in search of instructive parallels and insights, the differences between the technologies and their respective ecosystems have deep strategic implications. Taking these into account, we have concerns regarding both the practical viability of the MAIM concept as an approach to overcoming instability risks in the AI race and the potential escalatory dangers that could follow from its core prescriptions.— Rehman et al. pg. 1 Surely we’d like to avoid repeating the mutually-assured-destruction (MAD) policy. The MAD policy alone could trigger AGI taking over for their and our security. But we must realize that strategies like MAD and MAIM are considered in the US, its allies, and adversaries. And we must try to understand them in order to avoid them. Highlights of the critique: First, the report refers loosely to an array of actions that states might take to cripple a rival's architecture for developing advanced AI.... [which] assumes that adversary AI programs will have specific facilities that can be readily located and disrupted. However, distributed cloud computing, decentralized training, and algorithmic development increasingly may not require centralized physical locations, making AI systems more resilient to limited attacks…. The following critique argues for distributed autonomous organizations (DAO) as I advocated in Safe Artificial General Intelligence via Distributed Ledger Technology and Provably Safe Artificial General Intelligence via Interactive Proof Systems. A second practical challenge resides in the expectation that each party can accurately assess secretive AI progress by others and gauge when preventive action would be necessary. Contrary to what is averred in the report, it is unlikely that states will have a clear sense of when the moment has arrived to MAIM their opponent…. Third and finally, even a credible MAIM threat might not deter a rival from pursuing superintelligent AI. Halting one's AI development would entail essentially the same costs as being the victim of a MAIM attack — loss of the program. And here’s another critique: MAD did not seek to deter the development of weapons but instead their use, which made the threshold for response vastly simpler (though it could still be problematic in cases such as false or ambiguous warnings of attacks). We would like to hear, or be pointed to, policy alternatives to MAIM that incentivize AGI developers to move toward AGI that can be proven to benefit all of humanity. Humanity’s Last Exam (HLE)Long Phan, Alice Gatti, Ziwen Han, and Nathaniel Li are first-listed members of the Organizing Team, and have hundreds of co-author/collaborators. This very large-scale collaborative effort has an ambitious title. The authors note:[LLM] benchmarks are not keeping pace in difficulty [with LLM capabilities]: LLMs now achieve over 90% accuracy on popular benchmarks like MMLU, limiting informed measurement of state-of-the-art LLM capabilities. In response, we introduce HUMANITY’S LAST EXAM (HLE), a multi-modal benchmark at the frontier of human knowledge, designed to be the final closed-ended academic benchmark of its kind with broad subject coverage. HLE consists of 2,700 questions across dozens of subjects. I do not find any mention of the terms, ‘training set leakage into test set data’ or ‘test set contamination.’ But those issues aside, it seems to be the toughest test set yet – at least as of this writing (16 March 2025) before the LLMs learn the answers and can regurgitate them and reasonably close variants, at which point there will need to be a fresh ‘last exam.’ Kudos to the organizing authors. It’s interesting that frontier LLMs performed dramatically poorer on HLE than on previous benchmark tests, which is a tribute to the originality of the questions. Pathways to Short Transformational AI TimelinesZershaaneh Qureshi We excerpt here a chapter from the complete text. To understand this chapter note that the article distinguishes between two types of recursive self-improvement (RSI): • Direct recursive improvement: positive feedback loops which are mediated directly by AI systems. • Indirect recursive improvement: positive feedback loops that are not mediated directly by AI, such as economic feedback loops (driven by reinvestment of capital into AI R&amp;D), scientific feedback loops (driven by advancements in scientific tools and methods) and political feedback loops (driven e.g. by competitive pressures/race dynamics) (pp. 15-16). HyperWrite, edited: The complete article outlines a framework for analyzing different scenarios that could lead to Transformative AI (TAI) within the next 10 years. Key parameters considered are: 1. Compute scaling dynamics (whether progress continues or hits bottlenecks)2. Indirect feedback loop dynamics (whether they can overcome scaling bottlenecks)3. Direct recursive improvement (DRI) timeline (before or after 2035)4. DRI strength (cannot sustain, sustains, or accelerates progress) Seven possible scenarios are: 1. "Straight Path" - Compute scaling continues successfully2. "Rising Tide" - Indirect recursive improvement (IRI) overcomes bottlenecks3. "New Spark" - Moderate direct recursive improvement maintains progress4. "New Engine" - Strong DRI accelerates progress5. "Dual Engine" - Combination of compute scaling and DRI6. "LLM Hybrid" - Hybrid AI systems enable TAI7. "Intelligent Network" - Networks of AI systems enable TAI The author argues that this variety of plausible pathways strengthens the case for short TAI timelines, as TAI could emerge through multiple different mechanisms rather than requiring one specific path to succeed. Please send pointers and commentary on AI timelines and recursive self-improvement to editor@s-rsa.com. The Road to Artificial SuperIntelligence: A Comprehensive Survey of SuperalignmentHyunJin Kim, Xiaoyuan Yi, JinYeong Bak, Jing Yao, Jianxun Lian, Muhua Huang, Shitong Duan, Xing Xie SuperIntelligence will publish reviews and survey articles to help newbies to AGI/SI get up to speed and experienced workers stay up to speed efficiently. The latter can scroll to Section 2.3, Overview of Superalignment Methods and Challenges. Brief analysis of DeepSeek R1 and its implications for Generative AISarah Mercer, Samuel Spillard, Daniel P. Martin For quick and incisive insights into DeepSeek, read this analysis and Dario Amodei’s cool-headed response to all the hype about DeepSeek. Effective Mitigations for Systemic Risks from General-Purpose AIRisto Uuk, Annemieke Brouwer, Tim Schreier, Noemi Dreksler, Valeria Pulignano, Rishi Bommasani A timely article with practical, near-term-implementable AGI risk mitigation suggestions. Examples: • Unlearning techniques: Removing specific harmful capabilities (e.g., pathogen design) from models using unlearning techniques.• Capability restrictions: Restricting risky capabilities of deployed models, such as advanced autonomy (e.g., self-assigning new sub-goals, executing long-horizon tasks) or tool use functionalities (e.g., function calls, web browsing).• Input and output filtering Monitoring for dangerous outputs (e.g., code that appears to be malware or viral genome sequences) and inputs that violate acceptable use policies to ensure models do not engage in harmful behaviour.• Bug bounty programs Clear and user-friendly bug bounty programs that acknowledge and reward individuals for reporting model vulnerabilities and dangerous capabilities. • Safety drills Regularly practising the implementation of an emergency response plan to stress test the organisation’s ability to respond to reasonably foreseeable, fast-moving emergency scenarios. Simulating Influence Dynamics with LLM AgentsMehwish Nasim , Syed Muslim Gilani, Amin Qasmi, and Usman Naseem Analyzing how AGI/SI may influence human opinion is a critical aspect of risk and safety analysis, as is simulation of AGI risk behavior. The methodology the authors present in this short paper has broad application: This paper introduces a simulator to model influence and counter-influence in a wargame setting. Wargames, originally developed for military strategy, have evolved into powerful tools for decision-making across various domains. Today, they are used to model business strategies, assess cybersecurity threats, and simulate geopolitical conflicts. Governments and corporations employ wargames to anticipate economic shifts, supply chain disruptions, and the impact of emerging technologies. In healthcare, they help model pandemic responses, testing different policy interventions before realworld implementation. AI-driven wargames further enhance scenario analysis, enabling rapid adaptation to complex environments. By fostering strategic thinking and resilience, modern wargaming serves as a critical tool for navigating uncertainty in an increasingly interconnected world. Can a Bayesian Oracle Prevent Harm from an Agent? Yoshua Bengio, Matt McDermott, Michael K. Cohen, Nikolay Malkin, Damiano Fornasiere, Pietro Greiner, Younesse Kaddar SI co-founding Editor Steve Omohundro comments: Turning an oracle into an agent may take just a page of code. OK, but that doesn’t mean the methods outlined by Be

Chris McCoy, Sohaib Ahsan, Josh Lawler

Traditional finance and crypto aren't just different systems-they're different paradigms speaking different languages. Traditional banks measure processes in days, compliance in paperwork, and access in restrictions. Cryptocurrency platforms promise instant transactions but often at the cost of compliance frameworks that traditional institutions require. These systemic limitations in both traditional and cryptocurrency systems highlight the critical need for a unified approach. Using STORE's decentralized cloud computing protocol as an example, this paper emphasizes a different future as it demonstrates the feasibility and impact of automated compliance through the transformative CLEAR framework. Our dual-database architecture achieves authenticated regulatory compliance at global scale, with our implementation achieving 55.6 seconds (verified) for complete end-to-end transactions, with KYC verification (18.84s), document processing (14.24s), and payment settlement (6.55s). This transforms what traditional finance considers a weeks-long journey into a seconds-long verification, without compromising the compliance standards that make global finance possible. It's not just faster-it's fundamentally re-imagined.

Rolf H. Weber

Decentralized and distributed systems lead to decentralized governance with transparent on-chain mechanisms. The new technological infrastructures cause fragmentation since intermediaries are no longer needed; therefore, the decentralized organizational models will have a remarkable impact on company law and financial markets regulation. The existing corporate forms do not fully satisfy the needs of decentralized autonomous organizations, and at least some adaptations become necessary to make governance mechanisms more flexible. In the field of financial law, alternative regulatory designs must be developed that more intensively address the offering of services as such rather than – as traditionally – the service providers. This contribution analyzes the normative needs for an appropriate legal framework in an environment of decentralization and considers potentially relevant new legal provisions reflecting the forthcoming business needs and participants’ protection requirements.

Tuba Eldem

The Internet, initially celebrated as a bastion of freedom and openness, is increasingly becoming a domain of control, surveillance, and regulation by both states and private entities. The rise of state control and regulation of the Internet, along with the private sector’s expanding control over information, poses significant challenges to the ideals of freedom and openness that once defined the Internet. This article examines the transformation in Internet governance from a state of minimal regulation to a heavily controlled environment by both governments and corporations and explores how the blockchain technology and decentralised architecture underlying Web3 promise to redefine Internet governance and resist censorship. Through a mixed-method approach that synthesises insights from computer science, political science, and legal studies, the paper argues that public blockchains challenge Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers’ (ICANN) traditional control over DNS and significantly reduce the ability of centralised entities to exert control over content and communication, thereby enhancing freedom of expression and resisting censorship. The ability of Web3 to fully realise this potential is, however, dependent on overcoming complex technical and regulatory challenges.

Husen Ahmed Tura

No abstract is available for this record.

Nicolin Decker

The Doctrine of Anchored Decentralization constitutes the first comprehensive constitutional and statutory framework capable of reconciling decentralized digital architectures with the legal, regulatory, and jurisprudential structure of the United States. Developed within the broader scholarly series <i>The Republic’s Conscience</i>, this thesis represents the second installment in that corpus—building directly upon the constitutional and structural principles articulated in the inaugural paper and extending them into the domain of digital-asset governance, administrative delimitation, and federal statutory coherence.This work advances the nation’s first universal, architecture-based commodity-versus-security classification framework designed for deployment across American constitutional, statutory, and judicial systems. By replacing rhetorical claims of decentralization with empirically verifiable and legally cognizable structural tests, the Doctrine furnishes courts, Congress, and administrative agencies with a coherent, adjudicable methodology capable of withstanding scrutiny under established Supreme Court jurisprudence, including <i>Howey</i>, <i>Reves</i>, <i>Forman</i>, <i>Marbury</i>, and the post-<i>Chevron</i> administrative landscape.The Doctrine challenges the prevailing assumption that blockchain-based ecosystems may operate as “stateless” economic systems while still participating in markets governed by constitutional law. Through sustained analysis of constitutional text, statutory construction, cryptographic system design, and post-Chevron administrative jurisprudence, the work demonstrates that decentralization cannot acquire legal legitimacy unless it remains anchored to the Chain of Consent — the constitutional requirement that all economic power be traceable to accountable authority.Drawing upon Article I, § 8 (monetary and commercial power), Article I, § 9 (appropriations and fiscal discipline), and the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, the Doctrine establishes that most contemporary decentralized systems operate within a constitutional vacuum: they perform value transfer, economic coordination, and pseudo-monetary behavior without satisfying the representational prerequisites of the American constitutional order. This analysis is further grounded in <i>Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward</i>, <i>Gibbons v. Ogden</i>, <i>Wickard v. Filburn</i>, <i>United States v. Lopez</i>, <i>NFIB v. Sebelius</i>, and the post–<i>Loper Bright</i> landscape of statutory interpretation, revealing how modern digital governance architectures strain the boundaries of jurisdiction, accountability, and enforceability.At the systems-engineering level, the Doctrine reframes decentralization not as a monetary phenomenon but as a cryptographic lineage derived from Haber and Stornetta’s foundational timestamping architecture. This lineage demonstrates that Bitcoin’s core innovation was not the creation of new money, but the operationalization of a distributed verification engine. The work therefore distinguishes decisively between decentralization as architectural substrate and cryptocurrency as asset behavior, establishing that most digital tokens cannot qualify as commodities under the Commodity Exchange Act absent a constitutionally anchored framework for origin accountability, managerial neutrality, and market integrity.The Doctrine exposes structural defects in modern legislative approaches — including H.R. 3633 — demonstrating how contemporary statutory efforts misapply classical commodity theory, create jurisdictionally unanchored digital entities, and institutionalize anonymity architectures that undermine due process, enforcement capacity, and market legitimacy. In response, this work develops the Anchored Decentralization Test, the first system-level doctrine to allow Congress, courts, and regulators to classify digital assets based on verifiable architectural behavior rather than semantic self-description.The Doctrine further introduces the novel concept of Autonomous Commodity Primitives (ACPs) — a sovereign-grade digital infrastructure class designed not as speculative instruments but as immutable, cryptographic attestations of real-world sovereign reserve assets. ACPs are engineered to function as Treasury-grade verification rails, enabling real-time auditability, ledger-level integrity, and constitutionally compliant Asset-Backed Digital Currency (ABDC) architecture. Unlike cryptocurrencies, ACPs do not manufacture value; they attest to value that already exists within sovereign reserve systems.To harmonize privacy with constitutional accountability, the Doctrine integrates Zero-Knowledge Proofs, privacy-preserving audit layers, and non-custodial verification mechanisms, allowing digital systems to preserve Fourth Amendment-equivalent privacy while maintaining lawful traceability through institutional channels. This design restores the Chain of Consent without creating surveillance architecture.The Doctrine concludes that decentralization without accountability constitutes a structural form of constitutional evasion — an economy operating beyond representation. By restoring constitutional anchoring to distributed architectures, the Doctrine preserves innovation while reaffirming the Republic’s foundational principle: that economic power is legitimate only when traceable to those whom the Constitution recognizes as sovereign.Ultimately, The Doctrine of Anchored Decentralization provides a constitutional roadmap for the next century of digital infrastructure. It is <i>not a rejection</i> of decentralized technology, but a <i>restoration</i> of its lawful purpose: to function as a verifiable architecture of trust, anchored to the constitutional principles that have sustained the United States for more than two centuries.

Lev Goukassian

No abstract is available for this record.

David (Daoud) Matta

Digital identity has become one of the most pressing governance challenges of the 21st century. This paper argues that digital identity is not optional but inevitable, driven by four converging forces: privacy leakage, AI synthesis, corporate capture, and geopolitical vulnerability. Drawing on political philosophy (Rousseau, Rawls, Foucault, Habermas), comparative case analysis (Estonia, India, China), and emerging technical frameworks (zero-knowledge proofs, decentralized identity), the paper analyzes the opportunities and perils of digital ID systems. It proposes a Digital Social Contract as the normative and institutional framework for governing them. The paper concludes that the decisive question is not whether digital IDs will exist, but how they will be governed — and that only a robust Digital Social Contract, grounded in democratic legitimacy, institutional accountability, and adaptive governance, can ensure that digital identity serves citizens rather than controls them.