Debate: why MIRI treated human values as intractable and bet on corrigibility
jd_pressman · x · 2026-11-13
jdpressman pushes back on being misread as claiming loyal AIs will soon solve governance. His actual argument: MIRI and the broader LessWrong community focused almost exclusively on corrigibility because human values were treated as intractable—a judgment resting on a lineage of prior attempts that don't hold up. A substantive alignment-community debate.
Related event: AI Safety Circles Debate Why MIRI Focuses Only on Corrigibility(4 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Meme: AGI skeptic Scott Aaronson's new position is just one long scream — peterwildeford · 2026-11-13
- Oxford/DeepMind paper surveys 8,234 workers: why basic income can't replace meaning of work — lawhsw · 2026-11-13
- 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