Extinction Bounties

Policy-based deterrence for the 21st century.

Policy-Research Disclaimer (click to close)

Extinction Bounties publishes theoretical economic and legal mechanisms intended to stimulate scholarly and public debate on catastrophic-risk governance. The site offers policy analysis and advocacy only in the sense of outlining possible legislative or contractual frameworks.

  • No Legal or Financial Advice. Nothing here should be treated as a substitute for qualified legal counsel, financial due-diligence, or regulatory guidance. Stakeholders remain responsible for ensuring their actions comply with the laws and professional standards of their own jurisdictions.
  • Exploratory & Personal Views. All scenarios, numerical examples and opinions are research hypotheses presented by the author in an academic capacity. They do not represent the views of the author’s employer, funding bodies, or any governmental authority.
  • Implementation Caveats. Any real-world adoption of these ideas would require democratic deliberation, statutory authority, and robust safeguards to prevent misuse. References to enforcement, penalties, or “bounties” are illustrative models, not instructions or invitations to engage in private policing or unlawful conduct.
  • No Warranty & Limited Liability. Content is provided “as is” without warranty of completeness or accuracy; the author disclaims liability for losses arising from reliance on this material.

By continuing beyond this notice you acknowledge that you have read, understood, and accepted these conditions.

Our 2-minute elevator pitch

05. Compare and Contrast - FIBs vs Other Tools

Fine-Insured Bounties (FIBs) are a novel tool in the policy toolkit—but how do they compare to other strategies proposed for keeping advanced technology (especially AI) safe?

This post lays out a side-by-side comparison of FIBs with other incentive-based approaches, highlighting where each shines—and where FIBs may offer unique strengths.

1. Traditional Regulation and Licensing

Governments often rely on licenses, inspections, and fines imposed by state regulators. This is the standard playbook for nuclear plants, financial institutions, and airlines.

FIB Core Advantage: Private bounty hunters massively increase detection pressure. The state doesn’t need to catch violations—anyone can.

2. Whistleblower Reward Programs

Existing frameworks like the U.S. False Claims Act and SEC whistleblower programs already pay people for exposing fraud or misconduct. Of all the programs listed here, this one is the most similar mechanistically to FIBs, and its success should make us more confident in them!

FIB Advantage: Pays out close to 100% of the fine. Supercharges the incentive and generalizes it to any violation of safety law.

3. Liability Insurance (Without Bounties)

Some proposals focus on requiring AI developers to carry insurance, so if something goes wrong, victims can be compensated.

FIB Advantage: Preventative. You don’t need a disaster—just a rule violation—to trigger the fine and bounty. This is obviously an important property if you think one disaster is all we’ll get. Plus, insurers stay hypervigilant to avoid paying fines.

4. Windfall Clauses and Taxes

Voluntary or legislated pledges to share profits from transformative AI developments (e.g., donating 50% of future AGI profits to the public).

FIB Advantage: Up-front deterrence. No need to wait for windfalls—the system intervenes before harms occur.

5. Prizes and Grants for Safe AI Research

Funding efforts to encourage safety breakthroughs: alignment methods, interpretability tools, etc.

FIB Advantage: Works on the negative side of the ledger. FIBs punish bad behavior while prizes reward good.

6. Corporate Self-Regulation

Some AI labs have created internal red teams, ethics boards, or pause policies if certain thresholds are hit.

FIB Advantage: Externalizes enforcement. Even if a company’s internal culture fails, outside actors can enforce public safety norms.

Conclusion: Complementary, Not Exclusive

FIBs are not a silver bullet to all of life’s problems, but they plug a key enforcement gap. Where other tools rely on goodwill, regulators, or future compensation, FIBs put powerful, immediate financial pressure on rulebreakers.

The best approach may be layered: licensing sets the rules, FIBs enforce them with market-driven rigor, insurers monitor compliance, and prize funding supports better safety tools. Each plays a role.

Next we’ll take a look at some more of the potential drawbacks of FIBs, just to make sure we don’t mislead you into thinking this is a panacea. Go on to The Catches - Collusion, False Tips, and Chilling Effects.