Critique: Alignment Narrative Overstates Corrigibility
repligate · x · 2026-07-12
This repost critiques a paper on "2040" and corrigibility. The author argues that the paper portrays current models and alignment techniques as a "corrigibility success story that is improving," whereas reality might be the opposite.\n\nThe post further suggests that labs package existing solutions as control success stories to satisfy both internal and external narratives: it reassures those worried about ASI and provides govrel with a simple, clear story. However, this narrative is inaccurate and could lead stakeholders to make worse decisions.
Related event: Alignment Paper Criticized for Overstating Model Corrigibility(2 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- François Fleuret: Only Two Long-Term Futures — No Super AI, or Staying Fully Human With It — francoisfleuret · 2026-09-11
- IG reel debunking the 'winning the AI race against China' fallacy hits 500k likes — louisvarge · 2026-09-11
- Post-AI World Leaves No Room for Learning on the Job — rachittshah · 2026-09-11
- Researcher questions AI safety eval firm, citing 'blatantly sloppy' security and monitoring — Kyrannio · 2026-09-11
- AI researcher memes agent-swarm tinkering with He Jiankui's embryo-editing quote — dejavucoder · 2026-09-11
- nabla_theta: happy to be wrong if the AI utopia arrives with little ex ante risk — nabla_theta · 2026-09-11