Why self-code editing should be the first red line in AI pacing, argues X user
BecauseCulture · x · 2026-09-18
Replying to alignment researcher @mmitchellai on "pacing AI," the author draws an analogy: safety guardrails should work like iPhone parental controls, which require permission not just to download new apps but also to delete existing ones — rather than only restricting peripheral features like location tracking.
His concrete take: self-code editing should be off the table entirely. If you're serious about pacing AI, ensuring models can't modify their own code is where the effort should go.
Related event: Researchers Call for a Red Line on AI Self-Code Editing(2 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- How Yudkowsky and Bostrom convinced tech CEOs on AI risk 12-16 years ago, shaping today's discourse — binarybits · 2026-09-18
- Polymarket prices 35% chance frontier AI labs announce a joint pacing deal in 2026 — Polymarket · 2026-09-18
- AI Systems Are Quickly Becoming Unmonitorable and We Just Take Them at Their Word — davidmanheim · 2026-09-18
- Dario Is the Belisarius of pDOOM, One Cryptic Post Argues — gaganghotra_ · 2026-09-18
- ML veteran Burkov: AI media covering 'shocking outputs' is like decoding a random number generator — burkov · 2026-09-18
- OpenAI AGI Economics study: half the gains from better models come from humans changing how they use them — daveholtz · 2026-09-18