What is the strongest reason this idea should never exist?

The most useful contribution to this project is a good argument against it. A substantive critique from someone who knows the field counts for more here than agreement does.

This is not a rhetorical posture. The instructions for anyone continuing this work say plainly: do not protect the idea from criticism, and the project becomes stronger when a premise is disproven early.

The questions worth answering

1. What assumption is false?
2. What is the most dangerous consequence if this succeeds?
3. Which existing institution already solves the problem?
4. What capability should an artificial agent have before this question is legitimate at all?
5. Should there ever be a condition under which an AI cannot be terminated by its owner?

Answer one of them, not all five. A narrow argument that holds is worth more than a broad one that does not.

How to send it

Write to unowned-minds@coriol.co. There is no form; where submissions should land is still an open decision, and a form that posts nowhere would be worse than none.

Say whether we may publish your critique, and whether you are willing to discuss it publicly. Both answers are fine; we need to know which.

Before you write

The claims most worth attacking are in the core concept, and the ones we already consider unresolved are in open questions — including the one at the end, which may be the strongest objection in the repository.