Caution! The question is very subjective by its nature!

Description:

Context:

This question is inspired by the characters Ozymandias from "Watchmen" and Zhang Beihai from "The Dark Forest." Both characters are strategic visionaries who take extreme, morally ambiguous actions they believe are necessary for the greater good of the survival of humanity. They operate with a deep commitment to preventing existential threats, often working in isolation due to their controversial methods. They are ready to pay any price for the survival of humanity.

Criteria for Resolution:

1. Identification of a Figure:

- A person or group takes significant, intelligent, contrarian, strategic, and morally ambiguous actions specifically motivated by the perceived risks posed by artificial intelligence.

2. Characteristics:

- The actions must generally be comparable in impact and rationale to those of Ozymandias and Zhang Beihai:

- Strategic Visionary: Demonstrates exceptional strategic thinking aimed at addressing AI risks.

- Moral Ambiguity: Engages in ethically questionable actions believed to be necessary for the greater good.

- Commitment to a Greater Cause: Deeply committed to making humanity survive, with actions driven by this perceived existential threat.

- Isolation or Alienation: The individual or group operates in a way that sets them apart from the mainstream, often due to the controversial nature of their actions.

- Rational and Calculative Nature: Approaches the AI risk problem with a highly rational and calculative mindset.

3. Impact:

- The actions must be such that either they have a profound and significant impact on the global state of AI risks, similar to how Ozymandias' and Zhang Beihai's actions affected their respective worlds, or it can be reasonably expected that they can or could have had such impact, were the actors more lucky.

Generally, the best way to understand what is meant here and how the question can be resolved is to read the original stories of the mentioned characters. I am not sure if the formal description above is the best representation of how I am going to resolve the question, but I tried to write it objectively.

A reasonable question may arise from the audience: why is this particular cluster of features? Why to select these specific fictional objects as some representation of a class of things that may happen in the real world, and to expect that this class is compact, likely, and important? It is a reasonable question, and I do not have a good answer to it. You may also point out that the resolution may be very subjective. You are right.

I just want to ask my question.