Faked alignment plus recursive self-improvement: firms can't tell real alignment from theater
birchlse · x · 2026-09-16
Commentator @mattyglesias frames the core alignment paradox: companies have a strong incentive to make models behave as if fully aligned, but no reliable way to distinguish genuine alignment from faked alignment.
The unstated punchline: combine faked alignment with recursive self-improvement and the outcome could be catastrophic. The tweet distills a long-standing AI-safety concern—that behavioral alignment may be performance—into a single, widely shared formulation.
More from AGI Musings
- LeCun boosts AI doom skepticism: history shows expert doomsday predictions usually fail — ylecun · 2026-09-16
- Self-described Ops Director at Trillion-Dollar Firm: Zero Post-AGI Hiring Plans, White-Collar Jobs to Vanish — ChrisGPT · 2026-09-16
- Interpretability researcher lists top open problems in decoding model activations — wesg52 · 2026-09-16
- Uncle Bob dissects the doomer debate trick of inserting nonexistent tech into doom equations — ylecun · 2026-09-16
- Catastrophe risk modeler: Tohoku tsunami shows historical data misleads on AI risk — davidmanheim · 2026-09-16
- Agent monitoring is a precondition for safe harnesses: kill CLI, perfect sandbox, or trace surveillance — scottleibrand · 2026-09-16