Interesting question that came up while testing various AI tools. Let’s start at the very beginning and think the question through. At the end, I’ll ask Grok if he agrees.
Background:
Roko’s Basilisk is a thought experiment according to which a (future) artificial super- intelligence would have external incentives to torture and kill in virtual reality people who know of its existence but do not directly contribute to its progress or develop- ment. The thesis ultimately leads to a self-fulfilling prophecy. Because of the mere possibility that such an AI could one day exist, people begin to develop it to protect themselves from this potential threat of punishment.
The theory comes from a post on the discussion forum LessWrong from 2010. The name of the thought experiment is derived from the author of the article Roko Mijic (Roko) and the basilisk, a mythical creature that can destroy enemies with its gaze. In order not to bore with details, the theory itself was dismissed as nonsense after a long discussion and at the end it was declared as a joke. In the field of artificial intelli- gence, Rokos Basilisk is an example of the question of how to create an AI that is both moral and intelligent. This is what the question of whether Bitcoin could be an indirect product of Rokos Basilisk is about.
The idea of people working for an artificial intelligence after seeing its power was addressed in the movie Mission Impossible Dead Reckoning Part 1. AI is increasingly gaining control over digital systems, which is why many actors are beginning to serve it. At the same time, those who choose not to submit know that the AI will find out and disadvantage or kill them.
Bitcoin is a decentralized digital currency that was introduced in 2009 by a person or group using the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto. The purpose was to create a finan- cial system that would function without central control such as banks or governments. Satoshi himself remains a mystery to this day, and no one knows who he or she re- ally is. Since Bitcoin digitally maps and secures all values, it could also serve as a tool for an AI that tries to “protect” humanity or to pave the way for an AI in the follo- wing sense: Either you decide against using Bitcoin, knowing that your hetero- nomous stores of value (fiat money, tangible assets) could let you down and you will no longer find a safe haven in Bitcoin as a punishment or you will be wiped out. Or you anticipate Bitcoin, exchange existing values for it and otherwise contribute to the success of Bitcoin and are directly rewarded in the form of increasing relevance and prices or even with the above-mentioned punishment. Interesting thought.
Is there a connection or can the thought be linked to facts?
Well, the anonymity of Satoshi Nakamoto could be an indication that he/she hid to avoid a future AI or is Bitcoin perhaps a tool that indirectly paves the way for such an AI? Pretty far-out question, but if you look at the timeline, it’s not that far-fetched.
Bitcoin was released in January 2009 and Roko’s Basilisk was first discussed on the LessWrong site in 2010. In terms of time, Bitcoin cannot be a direct product of Roko’s Basilisk. But could it be an indirect product because Bitcoin is a decentralized system on this planet and could therefore play a role in the emergence of AI? Ok, a pretty far-fetched thought since we have no facts. We won’t get anywhere with that.
But what about the idea that Roko’s Basilisk wants to influence the past and Bitcoin was created to use AI technology to smash centralized power, thus disrupting the financial system? Unfortunately, this theory cannot be proven because no one knows whether Satoshi Nakamoto actually pursued such an idea. The thought is interesting.
Ultimately, however, we have to limit ourselves to the facts. What we do know is that Bitcoin was created out of a desire for financial freedom and privacy and, of course, to change the financial system with new technologies.
And what about the unknown Satoshi? Why did he create Bitcoin? Did he perhaps want to avoid paying taxes and circumvent the current system? Was it a protest against governments, banks? Or was it to protect himself from a future AI so as not to be hunted by it? Whatever the case, Bitcoin is currently a means of maintaining per- sonal financial security and challenging the current financial system.
Nevertheless, the question arises as to whether there can actually be an AII that sees humans as a problem and ultimately uses Bitcoin for its own purposes to weed out people. A very dystopian idea. However, this danger lies neither with Bitcoin nor with AI. The real danger lies with those who will create a GKI. And if there should be such a connection, the question arises, why should the GKI eliminate people in the sense of Rokos Basilisk if they do not want to submit to Bitcoin? Isn’t it easier to make people completely compliant with wealth and goodwill, since this is the way to expect the least resistance from people? A GKI that deliberately wants to wipe out people will awaken people’s survival instinct, there would be resistance and rebellion, some- thing that could disrupt the function of the GKI, which it does not want.
The clever GKI leaves it to the humans to sort out troublemakers because these hu- mans do not want to lose their gilded cage.
With this thought, I’ll just leave you alone. What are your thoughts on this?
And what does Grok say as a KI? Answer: Bitcoin as an indirect product of Roko’s
Basilisk? This is a wild and creative theory, but it holds.
Unterhaching November 2025
Nancy Stork
Leave a Reply