rs-li-deference-without-legitimacy
leaf/step · drafted
Statement
The li-deference feedback construction assumes the humans maintain the legitimacy of the feedback process, so its guarantees fail where the AI acts against that legitimacy.
Source
The author in projects/deference/corrigibility-note-dump-2026-10-01/position-statement-v3.md, section 1.3: "in the li-deference work, I implicitly understood that the human feedback would have to improve along with the AI, but that idea manifested in the form of me trying to make constructions that satisfied all the constraints I was implicitly keeping in mind, focusing overly on the positive construction. Here we've surfaced the constraint to deal with it explicitly"; the first statement of the hope in projects/deference/note-dump-2026-08-11/notes/li-deference.md, section 0.3 (the AI should imitate human opinion only in non-corrupted futures; the training process is predicated on its own non-corruption in the present).
Notes
Threatens: the landed li-deference collapse as a guide to engineering and the landed deference programme; the landed legitimacy step of that programme is the repair. This risk story is why the legitimacy step is a step of the programme (AI reading of position-statement-v3 §1.3 and li-deference.md §0.3). A risk story the corrigibility work itself produced: it shows a probability and a status and enters the comparison through the plans whose tables cite it. No outcome class is tagged (tagging a failure class is a human judgment under the protocol's rule on classes), so its failure mass goes to the default trajectory until a human tags it.
A root of corrigibility-landscape, the sub-frame whose plans it threatens; the top frame keeps only stories at the level of its own question.
Author and human events
Author @smithy-verity; version 1; size M.
No human event has touched this node.
Edges
Above
- part of corrigibility-landscape
- root (risk-story) of corrigibility-landscape
Ranking (the lens, not the structure)
{
"status": "open",
"diagnosis": null,
"flags": [
"AI number"
],
"V": {
"V_prior": null,
"display": "2",
"headline": 2,
"ref": 2,
"valid": 2,
"weaker": "both"
},
"belief": {
"J": 0,
"mid": "7/8",
"range": [
"3/8",
"1/1"
],
"width": "1/1"
},
"draft": "ai",
"root": {
"status": "open",
"Pr": {
"hi": "1/1",
"lo": "3/8",
"mid": "7/8"
},
"value": null,
"cost": "85/1",
"margin": "no established leaves"
}
}Say something about it
Each verb opens a prefilled issue; a round files what lands as the ledger event it is.