AI research and discussion on LessWrong. www.lesswrong.com
A progress update on a research agenda for automated Husserlian coherent extrapolated volition (CEV), with AI-generated toy-world papers on CEV-like value-aggregation ideas and an unfinished link to constraining real agents.
Argues that making products like Claude friendly is not the same as solving superintelligence alignment, and warns that conflating the two gives a false sense of security about safe future AI.
A personal 2026 research agenda arguing that AI alignment needs first a correct ontology and ethics of decision-making, then methods to build those into frontier AI architectures.
Proposes a brain-inspired LLM architecture with multiple assessor heads that score thoughts, trained with AI-labelled RL from early in pretraining, to improve alignment and resist reward hacking.
A conceptual argument that instilling good values is a much smaller target than instilling general intelligence, because human values have high algorithmic complexity while competent optimisation is simple.
Essay arguing that safe superintelligence may require decades of philosophical progress, possibly accelerated by human-AI collaboration, and that loss of human control is the central risk on the current path.
Argues that maintaining alignment during recursive self-improvement requires continual feedback control, with evaluations as sensors and interventions as actuators, rather than a single static value initialisation.
Proposes recursive alignment, defined as AI aligning with the process of resolving goal conflicts, and argues it could resist power-seeking and deceptive alignment, critiquing deliberative alignment.