Agent safety debate: capability sets damage size, but 'orphanhood' decides accountability
mariotelfig · x · 2026-10-06
In a debate around Yoshua Bengio's agent safety framing, @vnosti argues the cybersecurity/sandbox view is too narrow. The real missing piece is older than sandboxes: every agent needs a holder — a seal, a tablet declaring whose account and orders it acts on, with the surface itself gating admission. His thesis: capability predicts the size of the damage; orphanhood predicts whether anyone prevents it or answers for it.
More from AGI Musings
- Alignment debate: is mechanistic interpretability a prerequisite, or do incentives suffice? — sudoraohacker · 2026-10-06
- LLM MoEs run at ~5% sparsity, cited as counterexample in consciousness complexity debate — JoshPurtell · 2026-10-06
- Consciousness at 10^15-10^16 Ops/Sec? X Users Clash Over Brain Complexity — JoshPurtell · 2026-10-06
- Noah Smith: AI isn't taking college grads' jobs, but it is taking artists' work — i_dg23 · 2026-10-06
- A measurable test for AI consciousness: metamorphic architectures reinvented each token — ryunuck · 2026-10-06
- Personal agents may have a stronger business model than productivity apps, says VC — vaibhavbetter · 2026-10-06