Manheim: without distinguishing safety from alignment, AI policy is impossible
davidmanheim · x · 2026-09-22
Continuing the terminology debate, the counterpart holds that "alignment" is indispensable in technical discussions, just not in general policy discourse, and that jargon misappropriation is unavoidable—one can only politely correct it. David Manheim strongly disagrees: if we cannot make the substantive point that a system's safety differs from its alignment, we cannot make reasonable policy decisions about future systems—which is exactly the current debate.
Related event: AI Safety Researchers Debate Whether "Alignment" Belongs in Policy Talks(4 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Business strategy debate: hide the AI behind humans, not humans behind AI — annetgriffin · 2026-11-12
- If superhuman AI researchers are imminent, will capability problems be easier than safety ones? — ronbodkin · 2026-11-12
- "AI is a terrible teacher": viral pushback against personalized AI tutoring hype — RachelVT42 · 2026-11-12
- TissueMicroscopyBench: 49 evals to test AI agents on biological microscopy — kenbwork · 2026-11-12
- OpenAI, Anthropic and DeepMind job posts signal PMs must write evals and code — aakashgupta · 2026-11-12
- Architecture study sparks monitoring concerns over a multi-hop planning spike — ChowdhuryNeil · 2026-11-12