Posted in my personal capacity
The AGI governance community has recently converged on compute governance[1] as a promising lever for reducing existential risks from AI.
One likely building block for any maximally secure compute governance regime is stock and flow accounting of (some kinds of) compute: i.e., requiring realtime accurate declaration to regulators of who possesses which uniquely numbered regulated chips, with penalties for undeclared or unauthorized[2] transfers.
To understand the optimal design and feasibility of such a regime, we seek historical analogies for similar regimes. One that we are already familiar with include:
What are other good existing or historical analogies for compute stock and flow accounting? An ideal analogy will have many of the following traits:[3]
More and better examples of stock and flow accounting mechanisms could be extremely informative in improving compute governance proposals.
See, e.g., this sequence by Lennart Heim. ↩︎
The question of which types of transfers ought to be authorized is important but beyond the scope of this post. ↩︎
NB: Many of the above do not have all of these traits! ↩︎
Material accounting controls on chemical weapons and precursors under the chemical weapons convention might fulfil some of your criteria.