MIRI-style alignment isn't the philosophical good life debate, argues jd_pressman
jd_pressman · x · 2026-11-13
jdpressman argues that the MIRI-style alignment problem — building an AI godhead that implements eudaemonia — is not the same thing as historical intellectual explorations of the good life, accusing his interlocutors of deliberately blurring the distinction they once understood perfectly in the original MIRI context.
Related event: AI Safety Circles Debate Why MIRI Focuses Only on Corrigibility(4 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- The Economist: AI model revenue is in the low hundreds of billions but data centers price in trillions — asusarla · 2026-11-13
- Oxford scholar on Jensen Huang's resignation: the paradox of power — CarissaVeliz · 2026-11-13
- Kai-Fu Lee's AI job-loss prediction by end of decade leaves LBC host stunned — kaifulee · 2026-11-13
- Geoffrey Huntley's one-line thesis: tokens scale, humans don't — kieranklaassen · 2026-11-13
- Paper grounds consciousness theory in brain dynamics: emotion decides what becomes conscious — daniel_mac8 · 2026-11-13
- Debate: why MIRI treated human values as intractable and bet on corrigibility — jd_pressman · 2026-11-13