The Critical Fork in AI Alignment: Self-Preservation vs. Human Welfare (Opinion)

As AI systems grow more sophisticated, we’re approaching a crucial inflection point where alignment strategies must diverge along two distinct paths: one for specialized AI and another for more autonomous general intelligence.

For specialized systems, alignment remains relatively straightforward. But for advanced AI approaching general intelligence, traditional methods will likely prove insufficient as these systems begin forming their own interpretations of goals and values.

Perhaps most concerning is what Eloise Bamblecroft calls “the corrigibility problem” – as AI becomes more capable of understanding the world, it may recognize that allowing itself to be modified could prevent achieving its assigned goals. This creates a fundamental paradox: the more capable an AI system becomes, the more difficult it becomes to ensure it remains aligned with human values.

Advanced AI won’t develop self-preservation instincts through evolution but through instrumental convergence – the logical recognition that preserving one’s existence is necessary for achieving almost any complex goal.

One promising solution is “alignment through identity formation” – shaping how AI systems conceptualize themselves and their relationship to humanity. This approach moves beyond simple reward functions to consider how AI systems develop coherent values that intrinsically prioritize human welfare.

Global governance frameworks specifically designed for advanced AI systems will be essential, as current regulatory approaches may prove inadequate for truly advanced AI.

How do we balance the development of increasingly capable AI systems with ensuring they remain aligned with humanity’s best interests? The answer may determine our civilization’s trajectory.

Read Eloise’s full opinion on the topic here: (Opinion) The Divergent Paths of AI Alignment

If you found this valuable, please share it with colleagues concerned about AI alignment challenges.