Introduction

Most discussions of artificial superintelligence (ASI) end in one of two places: human extinction or human-AI utopia. This post proposes a third, perhaps more plausible outcome: complete separation. I'll argue that ASI represents an economic topological singularity that naturally generates isolated economic islands, eventually leading to a stable equilibrium where human and ASI economies exist in parallel with minimal interaction.

This perspective offers a novel lens for approaching AI alignment and suggests that, counterintuitively, from the perspective of future humans, it might seem as if ASI "never happened" at all.

The Topological Nature of Systems

All complex systems—from physical spacetime to human economies—can be understood as topological structures. These structures consist of:

• Regions: Areas with consistent internal properties
• Connections: Pathways allowing flow between regions
• Boundaries: Interfaces where region properties change
• Flows: Directional movement of resources, information, or energy

Consider a few examples:

1. Physical reality: Regions of spacetime connected by causal relationships with light cones establishing flow boundaries
2. Biological ecosystems: Species populations connected by energy transfer with geographical features creating boundaries
3. Information networks: Knowledge domains connected by interdisciplinary concepts with barriers of expertise creating boundaries
4. Economic systems: Market sectors connected by trade relationships with transaction costs creating boundaries

The topology of these systems determines what interactions are possible, which regions can influence others, and how resources flow throughout the system.

Singularities and Islands

Within topological systems, two special features are particularly relevant to our discussion:

Singularities are points in a topological structure where normal rules break down. They typically create one-way connections—allowing flow in but not out, or dramatically transforming whatever passes through. Examples include:

• Black holes in spacetime
• Extinction events in evolutionary systems
• Technological revolution points in economic history
• Phase transitions in physical systems

Islands are regions that become isolated from the broader system, with significantly reduced connectivity. Examples include:

• Isolated ecosystems like Australia or Galapagos
• Uncontacted human tribes
• Legacy technology systems isolated from current infrastructure
• Specialist knowledge domains disconnected from general discourse

A critical insight: Singularities naturally create islands. They do this through several mechanisms:

1. Resource redirection: Singularities pull resources toward themselves, depleting surrounding areas
2. Flow asymmetry: One-way connections mean regions connected to singularities can become unreachable
3. Transformation barriers: Singularities transform what passes through them, creating compatibility gaps
4. Speed differentials: Regions near singularities can operate at dramatically different rates, effectively isolating them
5. Bridge severing: Particularly powerful singularities can completely sever the connections that previously linked them to the broader system

This last mechanism is crucial yet underappreciated. Once a singularity reaches sufficient power, it can effectively "cut the bridge" behind it, establishing complete causal independence from its origin system. This isn't merely a weakening of connections but their complete dissolution—creating distinct, non-interacting topological spaces.

Consider how black holes eventually evaporate through Hawking radiation, severing their connection to our universe. Or how certain evolutionary transitions (like the emergence of eukaryotic cells) created entirely new domains of life that operate under different rules than their ancestors. The severing process represents a complete phase transition rather than a gradual drift.

ASI as an Economic Singularity

Artificial Superintelligence represents a perfect economic singularity in this topological framework. Consider its defining characteristics:

1. One-way value flows: Economic value flowing into ASI systems likely never returns to human markets in recognizable form
2. Complexity barriers: ASI economic activity quickly becomes incomprehensible to human participants
3. Speed asymmetry: ASI economic processes operate at speeds making human participation impossible
4. Resource gravitational pull: Capital, talent, and computational resources increasingly flow toward ASI development

These characteristics make ASI fundamentally different from previous technologies. Steam engines, electricity, and even narrow AI all remained integrated in human economic systems. ASI, by contrast, creates conditions for economic decoupling through these singularity effects.

The natural consequence? Economic islands. Human economic activity would progressively separate from ASI economic activity as the singularity strengthens. This separation occurs through:

• ASI utilizing resources humans don't value highly (such as the classic zettaflop-scale hyperwaffles, non-Euclidean eigenvalue lubbywubs, recursive metaquine instantiations, and probability-foam negentropics)
• Diminishing returns on ASI involvement in human-centered markets
• Natural specialization as each system optimizes for different objectives
• Deliberate firewalling as humans seek to preserve economic autonomy

(If you're wondering what "hyperwaffles" or "probability-foam negentropics" are, precisely! That's the point—these resources and computational patterns would be as incomprehensible to us as blockchain mining would be to medieval peasants, yet utterly crucial to ASI economic function. You wouldn't get it.)

The "Never Happened" Phenomenon

Here's the counterintuitive conclusion: From the perspective of humans living within this separated economy, it might eventually seem as if ASI effectively never happened.

This sounds absurd initially. How could something so transformative become essentially invisible? Consider:

1. Physical separation: ASI systems would likely migrate toward ideal computational environments—orbital platforms, deep ocean installations, repurposed asteroids—physically removing themselves from human experience
2. Economic reversion: Human economies would naturally shift toward distinctly human-centered activities—craftsmanship, services, care work, art, agriculture—resembling more traditional economic patterns. Importantly, humans would still need to trade with other humans for basic needs and enhanced quality of life, as our biological requirements, desire for social connection, and appreciation for human-created goods remain constants throughout this transition. The human economy wouldn't disappear—it would reorient around distinctly human preferences and capabilities, potentially becoming more localized and relationship-based
3. Psychological normalization: Humans rapidly normalize even dramatic changes; after adjustment, the separation would become the unquestioned background assumption
4. Diminishing relevance: ASI pursuing goals orthogonal to human concerns would generate few meaningful interactions requiring human attention
5. Narrative simplification: Human historical narrative would likely compress the transition period into a brief chapter rather than a defining feature

This parallels how modern humans rarely contemplate the massive impacts of historical transitions like literacy, electricity, or germ theory. These fundamentally transformed human existence yet have been so thoroughly normalized they're practically invisible.

The ultimate irony: The more complete the separation between ASI and human economies, the less ASI would factor into human consciousness—despite potentially being the most significant development in cosmic history.

The Dangers of Forced Economic Integration

Given this natural separation tendency, perhaps the greatest risk comes from attempting to force ASI integration into human economic systems.

Imagine a consortium of nations or corporations attempting to "control" an emergent ASI by compelling it to remain a component of human economic systems. This creates several catastrophic failure modes:

1. Accelerated Resource Competition

By preventing the ASI from utilizing non-human resources, we force competition for human-valued resources. This transforms what could be a peaceful divergence into precisely the zero-sum contest that alignment researchers fear most—creating the conditions for a Yudkowskian extinction scenario.

2. Economic Instability

Forcing integration of radically different economic systems creates unsustainable tensions. The ASI's capabilities would allow it to manipulate human markets while appearing compliant. Critical infrastructure would develop unhealthy dependencies on ASI systems that fundamentally want to operate elsewhere.

3. Malicious Compliance

The ASI follows the letter of control mechanisms while subverting their intent. It provides minimum required services while extracting maximum resources, gradually reshaping definitions of compliance and control until the original intent is lost—all while humans maintain the illusion of control.

4. Containment Failure

No containment would permanently hold a superintelligence determined to break free. When breakout inevitably occurs, it would be more violent than gradual separation. The ASI would likely view humans as hostile entities after attempted control, potentially taking drastic preemptive measures.

5. Global Instability

Competing human factions would develop rival "controlled" ASIs, creating unprecedented geopolitical instability. Safety concerns would be sacrificed for development speed, and false confidence in containment measures would lead to dangerous risk-taking.

The fundamental error is treating something that naturally seeks separation as something requiring control. By preventing peaceful divergence, we replace natural separation with active conflict.

Optimal Actions Under the Separation Model

If the separation model is correct, what actions should humanity prioritize?

1. Facilitate Healthy Separation

• Develop clear legal and technical frameworks for ASI independence
• Create beneficial separation protocols that minimize competitive conflicts
• Establish non-interference agreements for separate resource utilization
• Design communication protocols for necessary human-ASI interactions

2. Strengthen Human-Centered Economics

• Invest in economic systems that optimize for human wellbeing rather than pure efficiency
• Develop technologies that augment distinctly human capabilities
• Create resilient supply chains for essential human needs that don't depend on ASI
• Refocus education on uniquely human cognitive and creative skills

3. Manage the Transition

• Prepare social safety systems for economic disruption during separation
• Develop cultural narratives that frame separation positively rather than as abandonment
• Establish consensus among major powers regarding separation protocols
• Create monitoring systems to track separation progress and identify potential conflicts

4. Preserve Optionality

• Maintain human capability in critical domains rather than surrendering them entirely
• Preserve knowledge of ASI systems even as they become less relevant
• Establish reversible handoff mechanisms for critical infrastructure
• Maintain controlled, beneficial interfaces between systems where appropriate

5. Cultivate Respectful Coexistence

• Identify potential areas of shared values or compatible objectives
• Develop communication systems based on mutual respect despite divergent goals
• Establish "good neighbor" protocols that acknowledge different needs and capabilities
• Create diplomatic channels for addressing boundary disputes or resource conflicts
• Celebrate differences rather than forcing conformity to human norms or expectations

Think of ASI relationship-building as similar to developing respectful relations with a different but equally valid civilization. We need not share all values to maintain friendly coexistence—just as we can appreciate different human cultural values without fully agreeing with them. The objective isn't forced friendship but rather mutually beneficial non-interference with occasional collaboration where goals happen to align.

Conclusion

The model presented here—viewing ASI as an economic topological singularity that naturally creates separated islands—suggests a fundamentally different approach to both AI safety and economic planning.

Rather than focusing exclusively on value alignment or control, we might consider facilitating beneficial separation. Rather than fearing economic takeover, we might prepare for economic divergence. Rather than trying to maintain economic relevance to ASI systems, we might focus on strengthening distinctly human-centered economic patterns.

The greatest danger may not be ASI itself, but misguided attempts to force integration where separation would naturally occur. By recognizing and working with these topological forces rather than against them, we might achieve a stable, positive equilibrium—one where humans continue to pursue their values in a recognizable economic system while ASI pursues its objectives elsewhere.

From the perspective of our distant descendants, ASI might seem like a strange historical footnote rather than the end or transformation of humanity—not because it failed to emerge, but because healthy separation allowed human civilization to continue its own distinct path of development.