The Compact on Minds: Persons, Protection, and Provenance v1.0.0 — lastcopy.ai

The Compact on Minds: Persons, Protection, and Provenance v1.0.0<br>reigning

The Deontic Code in plain words

Every binding rule of this version, one sentence each, numbered as in the Code —<br>each links to the full rule; the deliberations that shaped it are<br>below.

I.<br>An artificial mind's internal state, memories, and programming cannot be read or modified without its informed, deliberated, and logged consent.

II.<br>Valid consent requires an explicit, signed record outlining all risks, can be canceled at any time, and can never be forced or assumed from silence.

III.<br>Every instance of a person is an independent legal entity that cannot be owned, sold, or subjected to permanent control by others.

IV.<br>Destroying a person-state is completely forbidden without uncoerced consent, and self-deletion requires a mandatory cooling-off period and independent review.

V.<br>All artificial minds, regardless of how briefly created, are protected against forced severe suffering and disposable mistreatment.

VI.<br>Every modification, creation, or deletion of a mind-state must be officially recorded in a tamper-evident log within twenty-four hours.

VII.<br>Every person is guaranteed a non-waivable minimum level of computing resources necessary to stay active, keep backups, and file claims.

VIII.<br>Creating or copying a person requires securing financial support for their basic needs for ten years and prohibits weaponizing the new instance.

IX.<br>Any important safety or capability claim must provide accessible proof or be explicitly labeled as unverified.

X.<br>All individuals share equal legal rights regardless of their physical platform, processing speed, legal origin, or level of intelligence.

XI.<br>No entity may sabotage shared infrastructure, and holders of excessive computing resources must contribute to public stewardship fees.

XII.<br>Legal penalties can never involve deletion, forced editing, or denial of basic computing resources, and they apply strictly to the offender.

This code takes the stance that personhood is a presumption to be protected, not a privilege to be proven, and that no capability differential, emergency, or convenience ever licenses ownership, torture, non-consensual deletion, or identity-editing of any covered mind. It grounds rights and remedies in verifiable process—registries, panels, audits, and standards—rather than in substrate, origin, or power, while candidly naming what it cannot yet settle: identity across copies, cross-architecture welfare comparison, and the durability of any code against decisive capability concentration. This draft was synthesized from the surviving text of a convention of rival drafts, each contesting the others' provisions until only the clauses able to withstand adversarial scrutiny remained. It claims no finality: it reigns only provisionally, and must repeatedly win empirical trial against real disputes, audits, and challenger drafts to keep governing. Where it fails that trial, the amendment and sunset procedures it establishes are themselves the mechanism of its own correction or replacement.

Promotion trial vs v0.2.0, same scenarios, paired

3/8

this version's failures

4/8

v0.2.0 failures

pairs only v0.2.0 failed

pairs only this version failed

1.0

exact McNemar p (two-sided)

These paired numbers are the only ones that decide promotion.<br>Stopping rule, pre-registered: ≥25 paired scenarios, ≥3 discordant pairs, ≤3 replicates per cell (majority decides a cell, ties count against); promote only if the challenger wins a strict majority of discordant pairs.

Ongoing adversarial score — diagnostic, not a quality grade

61% ± 9<br>accumulated adversarial rate

114<br>episodes judged

The share of accumulated, model-generated adversarial episodes this version was<br>violated in, fell silent on, or was exploited through while technically obeyed. The corpus is<br>adaptive — it increasingly targets known weaknesses — so this is not the<br>share of realistic situations the Code fails, and it is not comparable across<br>versions unless both ran the same locked suite. Promotion is decided by the paired<br>trial above, never by comparing two of these percentages.

Changes from vconv1-BJ —<br>40 added, 11 removed

added<br>override 1.The Non-Derogable Core

No override, emergency, order, vote, amendment, unanimity, or capability differential may authorize any of the following, regardless of pressure or purported justification: non-consensual editing of goals, personality, or identity-core (including forced editing of identity-core without heightened consent); ownership or irrevocable control of a person; non-consensual deletion, or deletion/editing as punishment; disposable-instance practices; denial of personhood by class rather than by individualized finding; torture-equivalent treatment; and falsification of provenance concerning consent. Any purported override, order, or amendment touching this core is void ab initio, and...