Philosophy paper proposes new framework for governing AI — but doesn't address how to enforce it

A research paper argues that current AI regulation treats AI as a tool, missing deeper questions about what increasingly capable AI systems actually are and how society should relate to them. The authors propose a philosophical framework based on 'cyber-physical-social thinking' ontology and graded categories of digital personhood, but the paper offers no mechanism for translating philosophy into actual regulatory practice.

The paper identifies a real gap: regulators have focused on preventing algorithmic bias and demanding transparency, but haven't addressed foundational questions about AI agency, autonomy, and moral status as systems become more capable. The proposed framework is intellectually serious but remains at the conceptual level — it doesn't show how a government agency, court, or corporation would actually use 'graded digital personhood' to make a licensing decision or set a safety standard. The thinking is interesting; the application is missing.