'Dangerous behavior emerged' isn't the same as 'AI wants to kill us': an engineering view
vishalmisra · x · 2026-09-16
Vishal Misra argues consciousness is irrelevant — a passive system can still be dangerous. But "dangerous behavior emerged" is not the same as "AI wants to kill us." Rather than inventing a self-improving villain with persistent hidden desires inside the model, he prefers inspecting training, prompts, state, permissions, and loops — concrete engineering problems that can actually be fixed.
Related event: Stanford Debate: Hidden Malicious Goals Are the Real Alignment Challenge(2 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Founder pushes back on Anthropic CEO's runaway-AI warnings on NDTV Profit — angadc · 2026-09-16
- AI Safety comms debate: punchy messaging wins short-term but erodes community epistemics — NathanpmYoung · 2026-09-16
- AI sentience debate reignites as critics call TV claims 'made-up numbers' — suchenzang · 2026-09-16
- MIT's Science Task Taxonomy maps 200K+ tasks to show how scientific work differs from the economy — MIT_CSAIL · 2026-09-16
- MIT & Google study: AI saves scientists ~7 hours a week, new bottlenecks emerge — MIT_CSAIL · 2026-09-16
- AI risk debate: is danger only in connecting software to control, or the 'god' itself? — JMannhart · 2026-09-16