IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - December 2015 - 51

objective, or utility function of the
system, and assessing the system's
achievement of this. Blockchains are
well-structured to instantiate, track,
monitor, fine-tune, and report on
such overall goals, objectives, and
utility functions of blockchain thinking systems, particularly with smart
contracts. The claim is that any form
of digital thinking and digital processing could be coordinated and
governed by blockchain-based smart
contracts. The higher-level goal set
of autonomous or semi-autonomous
Blockchain Thinkers would be to
maximize their smart contract-based
utility functions. These utility functions would be part of the constitutional setup envisioned for Dapps,
DAOs, and DACs, but specialized to
the needs and operations of thinking.

balanced day. Complexity math could
help to configure both the qualitative
and the quantitative. The variable
coefficients or Eigen values could be
the instantiation of quantitative measurement, and qualitative optimization
could be through their interrelation,
assessed by standard complexity techniques such as fat tails, high coefficients, degrees of correlation, fractal
behavior, and nearest neighbor analysis. A model optimizing for human
happiness would have not only a general daily equation with quantitative
and qualitative measures, but also
comprehend system dynamism and
variation at the level of other time
frames. For example, it is known that
variability is perhaps the most important feature in human happiness practices [11]. Instantiating utility functions
with complexity math might more
readily allow other complexity concepts to be implemented too. These
could include simultaneous multi-level
fractal intelligence, and shifting intelligence more explicitly into the structure of a power law, meaning being
able to grow at an exponential, though
measurable and possibly controllable,
rate. Different forms of Blockchain
Thinkers could be instantiated with
different utility functions, using the
blockchain structure as an AI sandbox
for testing arbitrarily-many combinatorial permutations of parameters such
as intelligence functionality and behavioral ethics.

Using Complexity Science to
Instantiate Blockchain-Based
Utility Functions
Mathematics from complexity science
could be used to help develop and
structure blockchain thinker utility
functions for implementation in smart
contracts. The first task is specifying
the different variables to comprise a
utility function, and their interrelation.
Some of these variables could include
economic sustainability, ideation,
growth and learning, contribution,
and equanimity. The second task is
specifying assessment and measurement metrics for the variables, ideally quantitative and qualitative since
both are needed to have a full representation of a balanced and happy
human. The most basic human utility
function might be articulated as 0.33
Sleep + 0.33 Work + 0.33 Play. This
function could be implemented with
coefficients for the different life areas
being derived from daily time spent
in the activity, automatically tabulated
via cell phone and wearables data.
This sample utility function outlines
the basic quantitative measure of the
time spent in each activity area for a
december 2015

Enacting Friendly AI with
Blockchains
The discussion of blockchain thinkers, smart contracts, and utility functions raises the specter of Friendly AI:
how to develop machine intelligence
that is beneficent to humans. What is
notable about blockchain technology
is that perhaps for the first time, it is
a credible model of checks-and-balances by which Friendly AI could be
realized. First, blockchains are code,
which is the language of machines;
∕

IEEE Technology and Society Magazine

readily understandable and executable by digital entities. Second, blockchains are not just code as in any
AI system, but code in the form of a
permanent transparent public record
that can be reviewed and inspected by any party at any time; so it is
known what the AI is doing. Third,
not only is it known what Blockchain
AIs are doing, they will not be changing their behavior after the fact since
"code is law" and cannot be modified
once set to run. Smart contracts will
run inexorably in the future carrying
out whatever has been specified; they
are not open for breach or discretionary compliance as are their counterparts, human-based contracts.
Most importantly, fourth, consensus as a feature of blockchain
technology suggests that interactions between cooperative moral
players within a society could be
enforced [24]. In decentralized
trust networks, an agent's reputation could be an important factor in whether its transactions can
be executed, such that the transactions of malicious players are
not recognized on the network. It
does not matter if malicious players masquerade as bonafide players
since the reputation requirement
and network incentives elicit good
behavior from all players, malicious
and bonafide alike, similar to the
situation of the often-productive
existence of sociopaths in human
society. Some of the key smart network operations that a Digital Intelligence might want to execute are
identity authentication and validation, secure access to resources,
and economic exchange. Effectively,
any important network transaction
that intelligent agents need to fulfill
their goals could require some form
of access or authentication that is
consensus-signed, and which cannot be obtained unless the agent
has a good (benevolent) reputational standing in the smart network.

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - December 2015